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: 2009-06-05   

Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia

ABSTRACT h" f_T [  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes a/[)A _-  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to  k =O  
unoperated cataract in Australia. }-T,cA_H|  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual {/qQ=$t  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than \Qf2:[-V0  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination s? 2ikJq  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography WS%yV|e  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who WYIv&h<h"  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater B#3Q4c$  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or LG??Q+`l  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. s(r4m/  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne 0g#xQzE  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 Ko|gH]B'  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria `]a0z|2'!  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract &q#. >  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had RrdLh z2N  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 kM(m$Oo.  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber yR"mRy1  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber [2!C ^ \t  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated )"7z'ar  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or l hST%3Ld  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven qqys`.  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate  ?# RhHD  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery -aV( 6i*n  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% EK&0Cn3z  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone "8~PfLJ+  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an ?]o(cz  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision hD4>mpk  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no }_('3C,Ba  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural '8(Ui B5d  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance lQy-&d|=#^  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated :6/$/`I0W  
cataract. NK'@.=$  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is >?6HUUQ  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced \xcf<y3_  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of B#cN'1c  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes wvxsn!Ao&=  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. 7 p1B"%  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health qw>vu7/z  
services accessibility, prevalence {s@ 0<!  
INTRODUCTION X4 Pm&ol  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in xLfv:Rp  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all ia3!&rZ  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate ).A9>^6?{  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be vVrM[0*c  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 B^/k`h6J  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting 6As%<g=  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is 7B\Q5fLQ  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in 9X +dp  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists 9!kp3x/`  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather 5&O%0`t  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral 7upWM~H^  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has pLys%1hg  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for #9F>21UU  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has 9NNXj^7  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 L]u^$=rI  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is B2'TRXIm1U  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the |\/\FK]?]  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract MvnQUZ  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence ^!0z+M:>^  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors u6Wan*I?  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to hUuKkUR+Ir  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. m7C! }l]9  
METHODS 2eA.04F  
Study population x5V))~Ou  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual ';c 6  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 ~P"Agpx3u  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to /&_ q"y9  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. P=6d<no&<  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of 41s\^'^&  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen :FfEjNil  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites ~!Nw]lb!  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. >cg)Nq D  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 /BD'{tZ]Sl  
Original Article DwZRx@  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia LME&qKe5  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD `JpFqZ'58  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Y_n3O@,  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, R! On  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au P:N> # G~z  
78 McCarty et al. F:q8.^HTJ  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural H{,1-&>|  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural QKB+mjMH#x  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify N3aqNRwlk  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a m'"H1~BW  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of UZrEFpi  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, h6^|f%\w*i  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of 6)ln,{  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. kGo2R]Dd[  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local >1;jBx>Qy%  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. (d D7"zQ  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian bv'>4a  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. zrG  
Assessment of cataract 9d-'%Q>+  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after strM3j##x  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine *($,ay$&H  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the EPH" 5$8  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using l~f3J$OkJ  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and =E%@8ZbK  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on 0XCAnMVo  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) e98QT9  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, D"$Y, d  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, @4 8!e-W  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than uax0%~O \  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to buN@O7\  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual {d;z3AB  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, tP*Kt'4W  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. 8a)Brl}u  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to :i?6#_2IC  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the 5R~M@   
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight ksOsJ~3)  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the .24z+|j  
analyses. FGHCHSqLq  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., f7\X3v2W}3  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in 6)*fr'P  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. ,3T"fT-(  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman .\ fpjQW  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph 0 3v&k  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were eT3!"+p-F  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera [1kQ-Ko`  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 6Yodx$  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately r|4D.O]  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated XF)N_ }X^  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies J QnaXjW2  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were Sv/P:r _  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, ~nmFZ] y  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph 6[ 3 K@  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical }aE'  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) Y` ]P&y  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to /tj]^QspS  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. 8} :$=n4&  
Assessment of risk factors aHuMm&  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information *`u|1}h|  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11  2hF^U+I}  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration "J+L]IC?AD  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, ^`id/  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension r1-MO`6  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and /fb}]e]N  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were f<wYJGI  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to Uvm.|p_V  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants mwLf)xt0'  
and use of vitamin supplements. WFahb3kx  
Data management and statistical analysis 8\P,2RSnt  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a qCcLd7`$  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, qsoq1u,?  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or _`;KmD&5  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at 'a+^= c  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms fiWN^sTM  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and jXf@JxQ  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency ~$K{E[^<  
checks were performed on the entire data set. qqZ4K:oC,  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was @br)m](@  
employed for statistical analyses. DVhBZ!u 9  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific 1O0. CC,p  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to |s/N ?/qi  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five iy]L"7&Z2  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates l VD{Y`)  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific ]vf0f,F  
data were weighted according to the 1996 auAz>6L  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the <bhGpLh-E  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. d'MZ%.#  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared bR"4:b>K  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated +8Q @R)3  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted :n13v @q  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the e.MyJ:eL  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. V1M|p!  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically ~ 2Hw\fx  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use !Ltx2CB2]  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The AcnY6:3Y|  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment SPlt=*C#_  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with ($<&H>j0  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence $S<B\\ %  
limits. h@O\j&#  
RESULTS {jYVA~.|Z  
Study population g$e|y#Ic$  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 jG&HPVr  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) p+?`ru  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did OHAU@*[lM  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was ^`lDw  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as QlB9m2XB  
a whole. +p>h` fc  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to "#pxZ B=  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The \(Nx)F  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to 1mtYap4  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural :F6dXW  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) )P9]/y  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. pe,y'w{  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery *%jtcno=Y  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases `"ks0@^U  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any r$4d4xtK  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). rd%uc~/  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three 3r[F1z2B  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence o` QH8  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes tR9iFv_  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% 0@{bpc rc  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract _VgFuU$h  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract Or$"f3gq  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall E|-5=!]fX  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was dEMv9"`*!  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). D0bpD  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract 8MDivr/@  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified J3oUtu  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated wpN [0^M-0  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents  *uK!w(;2  
as information about risk factor exposure was not dzbbFvG  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed -@w}}BR  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence v h)CB8  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic Z3wdk6%:}  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a yRQ1Szbjli  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use D` cy.},L  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private mPPB"uQ  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, /8:e| ]  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. nzAySMD_  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the e 5(|9*t  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having d7g$9&/q  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract *b{Hj'HaH  
surgery were not available. cRag0.[  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate h0 %M+g  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had 32j#kJW  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been Oel%l Y}m3  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment _E0yzkS  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant SMB&sl  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression GM^H )8U  
model. The factors that remained significantly related r4 5}o  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever ~(c<M>Q8  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been J7EWaXGbz  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors ZX+0{E8a  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate if1)AE-  
model. WqCER^~'>  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract 9zBt a  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with 2=7[r-*E  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 $K\;sn; |:  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort 1v|0&{lB  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total r|bGn#^  
(years) (%) (%) (%) Y!(w.G  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) JNvgUb'U  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) HyQ(9cn |  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) `09[25?  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) /bC@^Y&}  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) t08[3Q&  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) 5ry[Lgg  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) 3c`  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) ^}z:FI   
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) +).=}.k  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) & )-fC  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) wv%UsfD  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) 0J5$ Yw1'F  
Age-standardized $qoal   
(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) WUx2CK2N  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 85FzIX-F%  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% uE#i3( J  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, @Js@\)P 79  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). 7Z81+I|&8  
Outcomes of cataract surgery q^[SN  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior Tkh?F5l  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were 6k1_dRu  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular $*9:a3>zny  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular 7'{Y7]+z+  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact Fow{-cs_p  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of WD 7T&i  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected B@vup {Kg  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% aQ1n1OBr  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes yyjgPbLN=  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21,  OF( tCK  
P = 0.027). rAu@`H?  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity 7<F{a"5P  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without <QK2Wc_}-"  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract ?,! C0ts  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, j&,%v+x  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the $0;Dk,  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 l]P3oB}Yo  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this OFw93UJ Y  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four EMS$?"K  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these O#b%&s"o  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction Ni61o?]Nj  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one [V,f@}m F  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract t=r*/DxX=  
surgery. H?'t>JX  
DISCUSSION #mcGT\tQ  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically kM@heFJb.  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract !\1Pu|  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes cpBTi  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual l0{R`G,  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and |1"n\4$  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is *Q2}Qbu  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, >[gNQJ6  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract ]kyGm2Ty9  
services throughout Australia. dht*1i3v  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age *`wgqin  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is *z\L  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous i@#fyU)[G  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye 5KDN8pJN  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract RL3G7;X  
between studies because of different methodologies and ju?D=n@i  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well 5j$ a3nH  
as the different age structures of the study populations. @ t?uhT*Z=  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of E?[]N[0Kl  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. VRa>bS  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity %.VFj7J  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. ptEChoZ6  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the &S+o oj  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. U/3 <p8  
80 McCarty et al. {pyTiz#JY  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort rW B/#m  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total eJwHeG  
(years) (%) (%) (%) l's*HExR  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) aJ^RY5  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( mJL=H  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) Y ]6kA5  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) yRv4,{B}X>  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) XPQY*.l&.  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) %d"d<pvx  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) #cy;((zuB  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) ZF~@a+o  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) K)[DA*W  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) p]erk  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) Vx*O^ cM  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) @m+2e C77  
Age-standardized %UokR"  
(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) !b4v}70,  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract >JckN4 v  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. JsD|igqF-  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 Z(:q.{"r  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the qbD>)}:1  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude *9O@DF&*6  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the @Z2^smf  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). Z b}U 4  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains ^LAnR>mz^r  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban GLWEoV9<  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than }^tW's8  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, 8]j*z n?,  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in HP2J`>oo  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, :Fh#"<A&&  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens :erfs}I  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. Gw-y6e'|Y  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable n4InZ!)  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, x|`BF%e/v  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that PT39VI =  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and ]e6$ ={  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is %Hu?syo  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted z9Nial`p  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement *3\N j6  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We hg2UZ% Y  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction sT'j36Nc<,  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have _lrvK99  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this ~$d(@ T&  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their 1+ 9!W  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants "</A) y&  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the ]w_JbFmT  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ 7:e5l19 uI  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their o1R:1!"2  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to ~s*kuj'%+  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change ~,7Tj  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function x %W%  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in ),J6:O&  
overall quality of life.22 '*D>/hn|:]  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually y({lE3P  
significant posterior capsule opacification following SZvp %hS0  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% -ImV Xy]?  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated U".5x~UC  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear *k@D4F ruP  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an lvx[C7?  
opaque capsule. KAgxIz!^-1  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and QXW> }GdKZ  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, QmMA]Q  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We k}C4:?AT  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more ;3XOk+  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is Mm;[f'{M)  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 D$+g5u)  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any Hk'R!X  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of $]rC-K:Z  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care =]S,p7*7  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without ZW4$Ks2]Y  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the C3'? E<F  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated l6zYiM  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. 4'TssRot@h  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem gJ~CD1`O  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract ^7a@?|,q8  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will M:dH>  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the &8I }q]'k  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in \ AIFIy  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well z;MPp#Y  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes 5WvsS( 9H  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. \}~71y}  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract HYL['B?Wid  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for m2P&DdN[  
cataract extractions increases. 1 e]D=2y  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS pXvys] @  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants A!Tm[oqu  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the =dsEt\ j  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell _90<*{bt.  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and $E.Fgy:G  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient PT }J.Dwx  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal !8D>Bczq)  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. IMBjI#\  
REFERENCES JPHM+3v  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. uGF{0 )0g  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. )0DgFA6k_  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, S^;;\0#NK  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population vCNq2l^CW  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. ; O(Ml}z  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens !dUdz7  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated B:Ft(,  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. q"6$#o{~U  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related ?@7!D8$9  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. seRf q&  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. k5J18S  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye .6LRg  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population I$p1^8~L  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: ij! ],  
363–71. a DXaQ  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. y:^o ._  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye ?{jey_]M  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. wu><a!3`=o  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. MBU|<tc  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient X d o\DQn  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Kh[l};/F  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. 09 trFj$L  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated Yh!=mW!OY  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. MG~Z)+g=y  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. [7d(P EQL`  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too 9<&M~(dwT4  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal HA,8O [jon  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: h#KSKKNW  
77–80. &VA^LS@b  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice ^<-)rzTI  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? U. _fb=  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. l@* $C&E  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest {9-9!jN{"  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye 5>+@ .hPX  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic sve} ent  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. +])<}S!M  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading ib#rT{e  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. 3<"j/9;K'  
82 McCarty et al. 8/(}Wet  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & \8!CKnfs  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. Sn4xv2/  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume wK7w[Xt  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International d~rA`!s7`  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. 8s2y!pn7Q  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and ymqv@Byi8A  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. Y'~O_coG  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison 3<+ZA-2  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased ^67}&O^1 ,  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment $Wj{B@k  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. 4'dN7E1*f  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the I&#:/|{: 5  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health {6h 1  
Organization, 1997. du$M  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, nRB3VsL  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation Qs za,09  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. s|A[HQUtJ  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. k<Gmb~Tg1  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of .O'~s/h  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative Nv.   
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. "5<!   
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41.  B>:U  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated ^*`#+*C  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. O2ktqAWx@  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. B E8_.>  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract qQ^CSn98J  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and u9KT_` )  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. "*D9.LyM  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. M^Z=~5 12g  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to (>A#|N1U  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. Be@g|'r  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. >Rt:8uurAG  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A L5 Cfa-  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule n.8870.BW  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. #`gX(C>  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. 2bTS, N/>  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health G \MeJSt*  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. Zl&ED{k<  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in PVF :p7  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, ~<<32t'S:  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract kI!@J6  
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