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 <K0lS;@K  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes $o@?D^  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to rb_G0/R  
unoperated cataract in Australia. T5Fah#-4  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual m:41zoV  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than HIU@m<  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination k Z3tz?Du  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography 14&EdTG.  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who ?SAi t Q3  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater ]S[r$<r$  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or } F.1j!71L  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. >r*Zm2($MR  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne u<8Q[_E&  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 bk?\=4B:E  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria < 9MnQ*@  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract 8vRiVJ8QS:  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had Z~|J"2.  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 0%t|?@HoN  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber eXd(R>Mx  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber :1=?/8h  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated J53;w:O  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or }';& 0p2Z  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven qcot T\rq  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate kC0!`$<2f)  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery Y '5ck(  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% .9xGLmg  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone MH?B .2  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an JK(&E{80  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision f h ^_=R(/  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no h[]N=X  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural b {5|2&=  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance -?RQ%Ue  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated .{ -yveE  
cataract. 0Nu]N)H5<l  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is rieQ&Jt"  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced qM0MSwvC=  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of i[pf*W0g  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes Ic K=E ]p  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. o0'av+e7  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health |^Es6 .~  
services accessibility, prevalence {nefS\#{  
INTRODUCTION C]fTV{  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in p|d9 g ^  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all @<G/H|f  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate Wts{tb  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be (NdgF+'=  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 <6C9R>  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting -ZP&zOsDr  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is _o TT3[7P  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in C|\^uR0  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists zD^f%p ["#  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather k8e"5 he  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral ]7kGHIJ|  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has |W U`p  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for wLSZL  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has 15 o.j!S  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 82za4u$q#  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is U;{,lS2l  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the W8$=a  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract )O@^H   
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence Gv,92ny!|  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors I"sobZ`  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to qTHg[sME  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. 9/daRq$  
METHODS (1SO;8k\  
Study population UD<^r]'x  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual W(a'^ #xe  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 2${,%8"0s  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to ;D"P9b]9$  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. :+ 9Ft>  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of y'!p>/%v  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen ?PE1aB+{:  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites _`@Xy!Ye  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. rfX F 01I  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 O3C)N I\i  
Original Article :*P___S=  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia lv\F+?]a  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD ADyNNMcx  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia  _WDBG  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, GATP  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au dVVvG]  
78 McCarty et al. Z;Ir>^<  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural "`jZ(+  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural @8M'<tr<z  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify n$hqNsM  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a U/3e,`c  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of yo?g"vbE  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, nXM9Px!  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of ]m/@wW9  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. K{= r.W  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local ,WO%L~db  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. mq{$9@3  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian 6"7:44O;G  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. zfP[1  
Assessment of cataract m0BG9~p|  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after A{ i][1N  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine Lem\UD$D`  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the 9LqMQv"xW  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using >tmnj/=&   
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and uHUvntr  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on 2rR@2Vsw2  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) w!B,kqTG  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, VeNNsg>&  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, =A0"0D{\  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than Qb6QXjN Q  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to 1kvPiV=X>  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual 0^<Skm27"  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, Y91 e1PsV  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. ="5k\1W1M  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to Z%Tq1O  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the eEWro F  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight xVsa,EX b  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the a gmeiJT  
analyses. v5&xY2RI7  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., @7Q*h   
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in 4f{[*6 GX  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. Eonq'Re$  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman 9_J!s  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph ^w;o\G  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were $Q`yNEc  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera ,GdxUld  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 X;s 3y{ku  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately \b_-mnN"  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated $\0cJCQ3  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies fap|SMGt  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were  _/8_,9H  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, Qv&T E3  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph q*HAIw[<y  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical X)FL[RO%q  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) Bl kSWW/  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to uHfhRc9  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. T5 K-gz7A  
Assessment of risk factors L/qZ ;{  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information GIl:3iB49  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 _Ct}%-,4  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration fl!mYCPv  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions,  C#A@)>  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension iP~sft6  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and Tx y]"_  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were 1k!D0f3qb  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to {@Blj3;w}  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants X tJswxw`K  
and use of vitamin supplements. 'jh2**i 34  
Data management and statistical analysis |C~Sr#6)7  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a /DLr(  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, 48lzOG  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or S/a/1 n$ U  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at 6o$Z0mG  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms }phz7N9  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and '*8  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency ri_P;#lz  
checks were performed on the entire data set. gs$3)t  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was g<M0|eX@~  
employed for statistical analyses. ]a8eDy  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific ?A|zRj{  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to G?>qd}]y0L  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five ! &Z*yH  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates N0]z/}hd@  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific mG X\wta  
data were weighted according to the 1996 wyp{KIV  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the wbBE@RU>!  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. <|otZJ'2r  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared p#)e:/Qy  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated VcP:}a< B\  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted O)l%OOv   
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the 6{L F-`S%  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. ubD#I{~J  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically /({P1ti:C  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use ohtT O]\  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The S=4R5igrC  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment ZHz^S)o\[s  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with FZeP<Ban  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence ;jF%bE3  
limits. Xp#~N_S$  
RESULTS >)4.$#H  
Study population _'&k#Q  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 O /vWd "  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%)  -W9gH  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did ci;&CHa  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was YjX*)Q_sl?  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as |"_)zQ  
a whole. >n(F4C-pl  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to  $<:'!#%  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The G<|:605  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to ("b*? : B  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural _nP)uU$  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) NfOp=X?Y  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. L(;.n> /  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery _Cj(fFL  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases '\ XsTs#L  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any pG~'shD~Dn  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). b22LT52  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three 9?$RO[vo  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence _%;M9Sg3  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes 4Mi~1iZj  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% x vdY 8%S  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract j!7Qw 8  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract F'rt>YvF  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall d[S#Duz<&  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was TH YVT%v  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). dGU8+)2cn  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract uS&LG#a  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified puA |NT  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated #>XeR>T  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents V8tghw  
as information about risk factor exposure was not W-ez[raY  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed >IBTBh_ka  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence b9 DR%hO:  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic KXq_K:r?  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a 'u1=XX h  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use 'bC]M3P  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private 5a6VMqQ6  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, BKX 9 SL]  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. u0g*O]Y  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the 1|]xo3j"'  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having gvGi %g q  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract -zTEL (r  
surgery were not available. Xo8DEr  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate rd">JEK;;  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had XGhwrI^  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been St2Q7K5s{  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment Wy.";/C  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant kN.B/itvA  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression -;U3w.-  
model. The factors that remained significantly related k2.G%]j  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever R1/q3x  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been Y&g&n o_  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors l2s{~IC  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate :~D]; m  
model. hbfsHT  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract O_AGMW/2+  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with x6%#ws vS  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 q#'VJA:A5&  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort s1 =+::  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total fhr-Y'  
(years) (%) (%) (%) e#khl9j*bt  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) [ f34a  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) !oGQ8 e  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) #w*"qn#2Uz  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) Egf^H>,.M  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) :Eo8v$W\RB  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) nvH|Ngg Q  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) v)+@XU2wZ  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) Q6x%  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) \ iga Q\~  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) m|1n x  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) Up|f=@=  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) 4 | f}F  
Age-standardized H TR1)b  
(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) uLK(F B  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 tN2 W8d  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% &D*8l?A/1f  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, N"1 QX6  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). 'HB~Dbq`V  
Outcomes of cataract surgery &O*ENpF  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior u]bz42]  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were ET+'Pj3  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular RUX8qT(Z  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular y\z > /q  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact  5~s{N  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of ;($1Z7j+  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected j)";:v  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% #HG&[Ywi  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes Pb4q`!  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, QiU_hz6?v  
P = 0.027). =YHt9fb$c  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity h>W@U9  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without EneAX&SG  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract 9U'[88  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, 5~U:@Tp  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the \JU{xQMB  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 "kr,x3 =  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this L#ZLawG  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four @h(!<Ux_  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these kwF]TO S  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction $T/#1w P  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one PCZ]R  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract X HQh4W3  
surgery. y\Dn^  
DISCUSSION }{mG/(LX8  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically !sG"n&uZq  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract `j:M)2:*y  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes O#G| ~'.,  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual `M)E*G  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and gQR1$n0  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is Q"'V9m7 i  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, I+~bCcgPi  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract !o<ICHHH  
services throughout Australia. bP03G =`6w  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age agW9Go_F[  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is o\60 n  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous avBua6i'  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye H+R7X71{  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract x ^[F]YU  
between studies because of different methodologies and "Y(^F bs  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well Uz $ @(C  
as the different age structures of the study populations. f@x_#ov  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of 8 ?" Ze(  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. 0 {,h.:  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity 1vsu[n  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. E\iJP^n  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the <N-=fad]  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. [9HYO  
80 McCarty et al. {wv&t R;  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort ?$16 A+  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total (Z 8,e  
(years) (%) (%) (%) X\mz+al>[  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) f,JX"  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( ke^d8Z.  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) :Dj#VN  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) c(E,&{+E  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) 1I b_Kmb-  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) qS| AdkNL  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) E9L!)D]Y  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) 9 R   
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) kJ__:rS(T_  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) ?y46o2b*)  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) WDvV LU`  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) N"K\ick6J  
Age-standardized ]xYayN!n  
(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) +NT:<(;|i5  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract 9ClF<5?M  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. );!dg\U  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 Ym`1 <2mq\  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the .X^43 q  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude _\!0t  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the 4Lw'v:(  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). g*28L[Q~  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains egbb1+tY  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban \wFhTJY  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than #]igB9Cf)w  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, p[b7E`7  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in  J(^ >?d'  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, ?N(u4atC  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens dw3'T4TC?  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. hg{ &Y(J!U  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable 0T=jR{j!o  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, W!y)Ho  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that }~V,_Fv  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and |fx#KNPf]  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is yTP[,bM  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted y. T ct.  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement aam1tm#Q  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We /O+e#z2f<  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction G;Us-IRZ  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have BSjbnnW}"  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this MwN1]d|6  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their <nf=SRZ  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants t&8<k+m  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the 2n _T2{  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ LciL/?  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their Feh"!k <6k  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to {V{0^T-  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change r*c82}tc  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function -,[~~  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in P*}9,VoY  
overall quality of life.22 nl.~^CP  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually 9@kc K  
significant posterior capsule opacification following ;L#L Dk{Za  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% |2WxcW]U.%  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated _-g-'Hr+N  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear *pDXcURw  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an D!81(}p  
opaque capsule. tn(f rccy  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and "US" `a2  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, _%AJmt}  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We $71i+h]_  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more !"Z."fm*  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is IwZZewb-a  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 MYur3lj%_  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any buMiJzU  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of yffU% )  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care +&&MUT{ 3  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without e'}ePvN  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the !UUmy% 9  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated *l-Dh:  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. 3n}s CEt=  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem mcAH1k e  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract  "@UU[o  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will eG[umv.9b  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the o O{|C&A  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in A>&>6O4  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well sWojQ-8}  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes X r  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. !."%M^J  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract \'}/&PCkr  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for '6d D^0dZ  
cataract extractions increases. Gdc ~Lh  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Os]!B2j14  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants #%} u8\q  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the IV 3@6t4k  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell rH#c:BwSm  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and g-{<v4NGI  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient R~x;X3  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal {V t^Xc  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. w# gU1yu  
REFERENCES "0!eb3n  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. b;~EJ  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. 21)-:rS  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, c?V*X-   
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population ;nAg4ll8Q  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. QB.*R?A  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens %gne%9nn  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated R>YMGUH~w  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. Y/e N)  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related >w]k3MC  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. hAxuZb7 ?  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. c|;|%"Mk  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye r{6B+3J  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population }:c,S O!  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: gQ@P w4bA  
363–71. .KwuhmR  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. lo]B 5_en  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye p?`|CE@h7  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. )(|0KarF  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. ,h(f\h(9  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient HTtGpTsF  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. T~ q'y~9o  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. % OfDTs  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated C[<\ufclD  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. Mpl,}Q!c  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. 1n5e^'z  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too ^N}~U5  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal ZD] '$  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: *~oDP@[S  
77–80. MzW$Sl&:  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice ZWe$(?  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? {arjW3~M:  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. y7G|P~td  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest 5J2p^$s  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye 2Lu{@*  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic ve]95w9J  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. #?d>S;)+  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading {ZYCnS&?CL  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. l0bT_?LhK  
82 McCarty et al. = Ow&UI  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & [x()^{ ;2  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. ?*5l}y=  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume E2/U']R  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International CvSG!l.6f<  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. x=r6vOj  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and 7Qztc?XK  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. R =c  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison J3JRWy@?P  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased rG%_O$_dO  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment WW/m /+  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. QO^X7A"?X  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the ;+Kewi;<  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health /r{5Lyk*  
Organization, 1997. #IJKMSGw?E  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, )8>f  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation {8Nd-WJ{  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. )bg,rESM  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. oRF"[G8BV  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of AiI# "  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative $1 \!Oe[i  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. }Q(I&uz  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. [uV/ Ra*g  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated 3CRBu:)m  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. B{KD  ]  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. 4hz,F/ I  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract ';V+~pi  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and xf SvvCy  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. u^[v{hv'H  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. :!\./z8v  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to GlZDuU  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. 5!%/j,?  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. eci\Q,   
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A " <AljgF  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule A*i_- ;W)  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. b)@x@3"O  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. Or|LyQU  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health (*gpa:Sc  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. =@MKU  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in v836nxLM  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, B!anY}/U  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract F6/bq/s  
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:
免费考博论坛网址是什么? 正确答案:freekaobo.com
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交