加入VIP 上传考博资料 您的流量 增加流量 考博报班 每日签到
   
主题 : Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia
级别: 禁止发言
显示用户信息 
楼主  发表于: 2009-06-04   

Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia

ABSTRACT 6+MZ39xC  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes IXmtjRv5  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to O~r.sJ}  
unoperated cataract in Australia. w2!5Cb2  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual Cyw Q  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than a-t}L{~  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination Tn~b#-0  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography _pX y}D  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who Hw1<! Dyv  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater X676*;:!.  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or fE\;Cbi  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. wX3x.@!:  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne A 'Q nL  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 "Q:m0P xb  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria n]/7UH}(<&  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract W2F %E  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had ddDl~&}o  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 ;NrN#<j( !  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber k{/2vV[`]  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber \BT8-}  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated x"@Y[  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or j5*W[M9W  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven TS Q/{=r  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate 0ciPH:V  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery {2`:7U ~|  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% nVqFCBB  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone J?\z{ ;qa  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an `%lgT+~T  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision X\?e=rUfn  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no Ou~|Q&f'  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural VU1 ;ZJ E  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance . Q3GA0O  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated 4{Vw30DZ  
cataract. #!wL0 p   
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is V +/Vk1  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced ZyBNo]  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of t_@xzt10y  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes o(iN}.c  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. WN?1J4H  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health &8R%W"<K  
services accessibility, prevalence VXforI  
INTRODUCTION K252l,;|  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in r>N5 ^  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all 5gP#V K  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate @\ip?=  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be 3%Jg' Tr+  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 \~4uEk"]  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting bd[zdL#4K  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is @q9uU9c  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in ,^ MA,"8  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists 4e d+'-"m  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather yBKkx@o#z  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral ,5" vzGLJ  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has l^x5m]Kt  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for t?p[w&@M2  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has mA:NAV $!s  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 ^\kv> WBE  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is g+gHIb7{  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the B@Zed Xi  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract O@ jW&-;  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence 1bb~u /jU  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors  ]qCAog  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to (9x8,f0z  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. c F_hU"  
METHODS V2kNJwwk  
Study population %RgCU$s[>  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual ?#^(QR|/  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 4J*%$Vxv  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to s }q6@I  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. Hs<vC L \  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of 'M2Jw8i  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen 'S<ebwRd=  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites X"<t3l(+  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. :|xV}  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 Q}ho Y  
Original Article l=%v  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia i[)H!%RV*  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD y8jk9Tv  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia nb0V~W  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, L}CjC>R!  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au  qJ!&H  
78 McCarty et al. XPE{]4 g  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural z>+@pj   
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural bY7d   
residents. A household census was conducted to identify eZs34${fN  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a RVtb0FL  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of e>1z1Q;_uv  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, >lxhXYp  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of \'6hv>W@  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. MHJH@$|]  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local Kf D8S  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. K1 a$ m2  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian !Z2?dhS  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. u-0-~TwD  
Assessment of cataract 85Y E6^y  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after z/aZD\[_  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine Dsc{- <v  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the 5O<7<O B  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using <[Ae 0UK  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and q-O=Em<*  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on ~itrM3^"w  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) PJLSDIeN  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, ,[ &@?  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, > !k  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than 3 4CqLPg8  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to cLn&b}8'  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual < I[ Vv'x  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, rAq2   
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. fF37P8Ir  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to @w|'ip5@  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the :r* skV|  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight /9<zG}:B  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the Hy~kHBIL  
analyses. j4 >1a   
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., kKwb)i  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in Cc7PhoPK  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. _Vr>/f  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman X@JrfvKv[d  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph /ghXI"ChI  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were %7WGodlXW  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera U 1!6%x  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 :^7/+|}9p  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately kX!TOlk3  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated 2;N)>[3*J  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies C,$$bmS =  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were Ao>] ~r0  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, x%HX0= (  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph P5/\*~}  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical AB92R/  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) F"o K*s  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to C{7 j<O  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. ?QuD:v ck  
Assessment of risk factors rbfP6t:c3  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information T 2Uu/^  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 Hxe!68{aR  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration kOi@QLdN  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, F2jZ3[P  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension '*K}$+l  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and ;la sk4|  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were M:&g5y&  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to ?J[m)Uo/ K  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants 4O}ZnE1[  
and use of vitamin supplements. Lh eOGM  
Data management and statistical analysis RE~9L5i5  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a T\Zf`.mt  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, S3Q^K.e?  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or tCZ3n  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at (t$jb |Oa  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms vRp#bScc  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and r57CyO  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency >iE/t$%1  
checks were performed on the entire data set. _Z9HOl@  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was $Sz@u"ig%  
employed for statistical analyses. oll J#i9  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific -|Z[G N:  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to hn-+]Y:  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five J/OG\}  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates "}"hQ.kAz  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific 7sgK+ ip  
data were weighted according to the 1996 gXrXVv<)yw  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the Kyn[4Bu!?  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. ^t p6G  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared hDPZj#(c  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated ^?-SMcUHB  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted qe M`z  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the ,drbj.0-  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. cJp:0'd  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically & B CA  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use */8b)I}yY  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The PIo8mf/  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment |<:Owd=  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with Ln&'5D#  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence *!mT#Vm^  
limits. 7IEG%FY T  
RESULTS \my5E\  
Study population q:iB}ch5R  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 .zm/GtOV@  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) M&93TQU-  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did pUp&eH  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was lMn1e6~K  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as S)n+E\c  
a whole. &1Zq C;  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to ygN4%-[XA  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The \vKK q/f  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to |(evDS5  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural b$*1!a  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) #8{U0 7]"  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. T_=IH~"  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery _NwB7@ e  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases DI>SW%)>  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any 3EVAB0/$  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). $2><4~T;|A  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three $FJf8u`  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence i 6DcLE  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes Yg~$1b@  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% X5Fi , /H  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract EE,57(  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract (q 0wV3Qv  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall T F[8r[93  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was rFJPeK7  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). t ;-U  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract mne?r3d  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified d#W>"Cqxqa  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated |Nf90.dL  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents Y9w^F_relL  
as information about risk factor exposure was not \'>ZU-V  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed "NM SLqO  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence "C~Zl&3  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic d7U%Q8?wUR  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a #Ave r]eK  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use 4UISuYg'  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private 3[UB3F 4K  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, p_:bt7 B  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. ;) (F4  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the ] v8.ym  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having Zk*!,,P!  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract huTWoMU  
surgery were not available. Xf/qUao  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate tXg>R _\C  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had y7@q]~%  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been lWRRB&8  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment N_Q\+x}zq  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant 5m\T~[`%  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression 5LVzT1j|  
model. The factors that remained significantly related EpdSsfDP  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever Uf`~0=w  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been RS9mAeX4h  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors svj0;x5  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate rL3 f%L  
model. 7>$&CWI  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract 89+Q^79m  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with <xO" E%t  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 ;'7gg]  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort r{ }&* Y  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total $`'Xb  
(years) (%) (%) (%) "+k^8ki  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) )|Xi:Zd5>  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) Ce-D^9kC  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) x17K8De  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) t/Y)%N  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) 's7 (^1hH  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) ") i>-1_H  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1)  _ YPu  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) kHx6]<  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) 5FQtlB9F  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) x-Ug(/!^  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) A{,ZfX;SPO  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) #24 eogo~  
Age-standardized WB(Gx_o3  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) YfZ96C[a  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 MzX4/*ba  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% Nub)]S>_/t  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, D N#OLk  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). o{I]c#W  
Outcomes of cataract surgery 6E0{(*  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior pon0!\ZT=  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were '%\FT-{  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular ZCuLgCP?Z  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular rUOl+p_47  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact +204.Yj?D  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of X\ bXat+  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected 9W+RUh^W  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% <V_P)b8$1  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes 5ON\Ve_H  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, E whCX'Vaj  
P = 0.027). 71(C@/J  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity -lDAxp6p  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without +q-/~G'  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract #yi&-9B  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, [8$K i$;  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the !,z ==Qp|v  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 x!R pRq9  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this B?pNF+?'z  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four .lE7v -e  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these f tE2@}  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction U2TR>0l  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one 0<'Q;'2* L  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract zvAUF8'_  
surgery. 5wgeA^HE2y  
DISCUSSION Rt=zqfJ  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically B;=-h(E}vJ  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract 4/:}K>S_  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes BfOQ/k))  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual _jCk)3KO  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and \!Cc[n(f#  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is BK;Gh0mp  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, p^>_VE[S  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract P|' eM%  
services throughout Australia. YRRsbm{  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age , tb\^  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is 5% )<e-  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous <g3)!VR^q  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye 4M,Q{G|e  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract |0N6]%r  
between studies because of different methodologies and b;k3B7<  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well )oAxt70  
as the different age structures of the study populations. B/F6WQdZ  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of VxA?LS`  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. HY!R|  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity K*id 1YY  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. bpgvLZb>s  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the dgp1B\  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. 1O,:fTG<  
80 McCarty et al. "\`>Ll  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort /?*GJN#  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total J1UG},-h  
(years) (%) (%) (%) #AO?<L  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) ATzFs]~K;  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( w Sd|-e  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) l' mdj!{&  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) 1"yr`,}?8r  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) j/p1/sJ[y  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) mxEn i y  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) \` U=pZJ  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) J:Idt}@z  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) vN9R. R  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) G$mAyK:  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) l9t|@9  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) Lvd es.0|  
Age-standardized \)`OEGdOR\  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) U[EZ, 7n8  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract #1De#uZ  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. {&ykpu090  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 Mj6 0?k  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the !9t,#?!  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude e|}B;<  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the "IN[(  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). +3F%soum95  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains 2h:{6Gq8  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban ]{| wU.  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than %#x l+^  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, I%:\"g"c  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in Vbv)C3ezD  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, |=js!R|  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens C2{*m{ D  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. &WNIL13DK  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable l;d 4Le  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, R} X"di  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that o~7D=d?R  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and 5=#2@qp  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is +ib&6IU  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted o3$dl`'  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement 2<9&OL  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We lVCnu> 8  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction ]nNn"_qh  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have Kr?<7vMT5  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this L*OG2liJ  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their $zM \Jd  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants : { iK 5  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the A4g,)  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ {n&GZG"f  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their VTU(C&"S  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to %l ,CJd5  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change d_!}9  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function 7 0PGbAD  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in Vqcw2  
overall quality of life.22 ,Wtgj=1!.  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually P%ThW9^vnj  
significant posterior capsule opacification following KrR`A(=WL  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% 9oIfSr,y  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated 5g.w"0MkY  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear 3-oKY*jO  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an V>`9ey!U  
opaque capsule. 1_TniR3z1  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and D<:zw/IRE  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, 9kwiG7V1  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We EEMRy  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more AQ0zs y  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is -p%cw0*Y]C  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 2a;[2':  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any HYG1BfEaW  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of /EJy?TON*  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care Q+/P>5O/  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without $d,/(*Y#-  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the Jz*A!Li  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated 9Fw NX  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. Bz|/TV?X(  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem B~M6l7^?  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract jtq ^((Ux  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will hd,O/-m#  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the 2Q7X"ek~[  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in 2<@g *  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well Bj" fUI!dK  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes =d iGuI B  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. h(GSM'v  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract vT @25  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for P!IXcPKW53  
cataract extractions increases. G{O{ p  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS us8HXvvp{  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants 6__HqBQ  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the 1*'gaa&y  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell .,U4 A TO  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and s,pg4nst56  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient \rO! lvX  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal i2;,\FI@t%  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. .6I'V3:Kg  
REFERENCES ykH@kv Qt  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. +EqL|  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. P_H_\KsH*(  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, B52dZb  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population baL<|& c  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. WTjmU=<\  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens * UXa.kT@  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated !&`\MD>;~R  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. *65~qAd  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related wehiX7y  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. rW_cLdh]#  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. yD`pUE$  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye }_mMQg2>=  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population Fu\#:+5\  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: R6:m@  
363–71. T &bB8tQk  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. 1jAuW~  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye ,^ dpn  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. Nez '1  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. @`Dh 7Q  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient 86dz Jh  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. $2blF)uYE  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. rSm#/)4A  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated B<$6Dj%L  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. q|IU+r:! 3  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22.  twK3  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too 'YYT1H)  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal 8]O#L}"  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: 1=!2|D:C)i  
77–80. * kUb[  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice d-W*`:Q  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? oR7f3';?6  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. >?G!>kw  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest fD8GAav  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye se}$/Y}t  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic nrXKS&6  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. YB^m!A),I[  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading m`Z.xIA7;  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. +JXn   
82 McCarty et al. G Uh<AG*+  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & [(.lfa P  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. k)8*d{*  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume 1:./f|m  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International +@7c:CAy(  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. YG*}F|1  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and 73{<;z}i  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. :`<MlX  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison 3RcnoXX_  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased @ Yo*h"s  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment C8 }=fa3u  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. ?#nk}=;g8  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the {?A/1q4rr  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health /;u=#qu(E-  
Organization, 1997. q%)."10}]  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, ~4] J'E >  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation xf|C{XV@H  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. #H5 +8W  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. ?/~Q9My  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of 3-[+g}kak?  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative 8M BY3F  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. zcio\P=^|B  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. O >@Q>Z8W?  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated Q]dKyMSSA  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. ws U@hqS  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. c s:E^  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract |f$gQI!XW  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and *fLVzYpo  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. >]Dn,*R  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. 3S%/>)k  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to M`)3(|4  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. f/m0,EERk  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. fEGnI\  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A vJX0c\e  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule w (*},  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. gTd r  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. H}8kku>7  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health 1>umf~%Wa  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. ]v+yeGIKS  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in \GK]6VW  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, /8"rCh|m-  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract \J-D @b;  
Surgery Outcomes Study. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1998; 82: 1107–11.
评价一下你浏览此帖子的感受

精彩

感动

搞笑

开心

愤怒

无聊

灌水

  
描述
快速回复

验证问题:
免费考博网网址是什么? 正确答案:freekaobo.com
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交