ABSTRACT
(1#J% Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes
J+`VujWT of cataract surgery and the factors related to
y3fGWa*7e unoperated cataract in Australia.
oH_;4QU4y Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual
[eC2"&} Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than
ZpnxecJUJ 5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination
K*~0"F>"0 sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography
+F^^c2E were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who
Ymg|4%O@ had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater
C#Na
&m than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or
zzX_q(:S posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2.
~{jcH Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne
,%M$0poKM residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473
[k/@E+; rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria
?.Ca|H< was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract
?!` /m|" surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had
c}2jmwq
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49
?`PvL!' (20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber
_sTROd)Vh intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber
PamO8^!G intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated
u)+8S/ ) eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or
\RC'XKQ*n better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven
"i[@P) (11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate
|l]XpWV vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery
ddJe=PUb caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9%
K3#@SYj of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone
<^5Z:n!q intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an
9
a!$z!. opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision
',JinE95 impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no
:&V h? particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural
c7x
~{V8 residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance
*Doa*wQ status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated
a%/9v"} cataract.
3u*4o=4e Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is
pZqq]mHK quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced
#P0&ewy in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of
+M\`#i\g> cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes
Vt:~q{9*k achieving driving vision following cataract extraction.
4.[
^\N Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health
dx MOn services accessibility, prevalence
)rn*iJ.e8 INTRODUCTION
_=F=`xu Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in
5YE'L. Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all
v&DI`xn~ ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate
)rxX+k+b/ of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be
V5V
bJBpf expected from the growth in the elderly population.1
ls\WXCH Although there have been a number of studies reporting
S"NqM[W the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is
H<i]V9r little information about determinants of cataract surgery in
n'n/Tu the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists
bzBEX mC showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather
)~)J?l3{ than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral
il4^zj82 for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has
LM~[@_j shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for
>%}C^g
u) cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has
sJL&:!}V> been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10
:
~&~y-14 To appropriately plan health care services, information is
\)#kquH/l needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the
HVR /7&g community as well as the factors associated with cataract
36}?dRw#p surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence
CGW.I$u of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors
Pr':51( related to unoperated cataract in the community and to
#xsE3Wj-X describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery.
T0wW<_jh METHODS
u^@f&BIG]: Study population
h5*JkRm Details about the study methodology for the Visual
&N2N6&Ta/ Impairment Project have been published previously.11
u_w#g
jiC Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to
M8MRoA6F recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate.
kj#?whK6~ Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of
g/ T
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen
*v;2PP[^ nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites
\:%(q/v"X were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents.
a#cCpE Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82
B]nEkO'a: Original Article
?ZV/U!y Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia
/hr7NT{e%v Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD
-^&<Z
0m Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
6dq(T_eG n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne,
b1(T4
w6 Victoria 3002, Australia. Email:
cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au NO*u9YH? 78 McCarty et al.
Rvqq.I8aC Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural
!a{^=#qq&I Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural
wT6"U$cV residents. A household census was conducted to identify
du<tGsy eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a
G?L HmTHg resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of
]AINKUI0 the household census, basic information about age, sex,
F%@A6'c country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of
u4t7Ie*Q corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected.
:i0uPh\0 Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local
hr#M-K examination site for a more detailed interview and examination.
"M<8UE \n The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian
5Mro
Nr Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee.
-RE^tW*Yy Assessment of cataract
{ }:#G A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after
n<Z({\9&H pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine
xs{3pkTYD hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the
!O\82d1P time of the examination and subsequently from photos using
OSRp0G20k\ the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and
!8TlD-ZT/ posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on
X2#2C/6#u retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16)
]Z>}6! of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis,
/MIe(,>Uh cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity,
35h8O,Y PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than
}fp-pe69z 1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to
EuEZ D+ or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual
n7zm
>& acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical,
r )Ma3FL0; nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1.
?qmRbDI Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to
Jz\%%C intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the
LGq'WU31:) analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight
ny]?I cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the
T]^62(So analyses.
9>=;FY A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp.,
G'nmllB`] Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in
034iK[ib" height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations.
TtK[nP Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman
#oS<E1 Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph
U#0Q) the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were
]P9l jwR photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera
9Uh"iM
B (Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400
zv|2:4H film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately
$|zX| by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated
f- K+]aZ) by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies
`jDTzhO~ between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were
%h hfU6[ resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing,
E7WK
( the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph
h!M grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical
To\QjP- cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%)
TC
MCK_SQL for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to
-m\u the severity of the opacity in the worse eye.
u^^vB\"^ Assessment of risk factors
loEPr5bL A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information
! :Y:pu0 about education, employment and ethnic background.11
7dN*lks Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration
Ve8=b0&Y#j and treatment of a number of medical conditions,
9G9t" { including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension
.zr-:L5{ and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and
-fM1nH& duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were
_1!7V3|^ collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to
m1j*mtu determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants
AL[KpY and use of vitamin supplements.
fPU`/6 Data management and statistical analysis
goLL;AL Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a
pXtl
6K% questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation,
/hpY f]t Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or
?(xnSW@r on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at
BfXgh'Z~ a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms
[m->5H were entered into a computer with double data entry and
2"COP> reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency
PG2: ~$L0 checks were performed on the entire data set.
.4S.>~^7 SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was
=WyDp97@+ employed for statistical analyses.
C:GK,?!Jn' Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific
] ;KJ6 rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to
@<,X0S account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five
YP
6`L per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates
f0!))/rSD were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific
<<UB ^v m data were weighted according to the 1996
\TIT:1 Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the
/{Is0+) cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population.
qjc8fP2 Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared
85>05? tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated
GXcJ< v cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted
02Y]`CXj into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the
AJt+p&I[J Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract.
xg30xC[ final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically
y>:N{| significant. Design effect was assessed through the use
rUwZMli of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The
phQUD design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment
wrviR made in the variance by adding the variance associated with
m&xW6!x the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence
WJ$bf(X* limits.
vGvf<ra;H RESULTS
fJ5iS Study population
<qtr A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403
^"2i (90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%)
\j+1V1t9 rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did
&]g}u5J!= not differ from participants.16 The study population was
,ly\Ka?zO representative of the Victorian population and Australia as
Z|%_&M a whole.
dFRsm0T The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to
63^O|y\W8 98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The
Nc1"g1JR Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to
PZ2;v< 101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural
d.3E[AJa( residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60)
k\wW##=v and 701 (47.5%) were men.
^({})T0wu Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery
^b/ Z)3 As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases
*e<[SZzYZ dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any
T{Gj+7bQ~ cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9).
&?W0mW( Although the rates varied somewhat between the three
ydFD!mO strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence
83E7k]7] limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes
;l4[%xld with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5%
XO`0>^g (65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract
BD68$y (97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract
%9w::hav surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall
1cxrH+N weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was
j:<n+:HC 3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2).
YbR!+ 0\g Risk factors for unoperated cataract
,eOB(?Ku Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified
(XeE2l2M as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated
V:qSy#e cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents
S\4tzz @ as information about risk factor exposure was not
Q(@U2a8 available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed
(^s>m,h in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence
5pj22 s (urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic
%Qc La// integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a
wr5AG<%( measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use
.>CPRVuVI of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private
0F]>Jby health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use,
?$vCW|f glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status.
Yb+yw_5 In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the
d_CKP"TA level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having
n.T&}ZPz\v cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract
2-7IJ\ surgery were not available.
*#E
FsUw The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate
}M1`di4e analyses were related to: whether a participant had
/h+8A', ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been
wN`jE0
{ diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment
txW{7[w+, status (currently employed) and age. These significant
QOjqQfmM; factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression
q-.,nMUF model. The factors that remained significantly related
:e]a$ to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever
5Y.vJz seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been
E^QlJ8 diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors
FB
_pw!z were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate
y<HO:kZ8` model.
)\_:{ c The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract
`4(e who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with
#1`-*.u Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79
#N#'5w-G Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort
N03HQp)g Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total
N"8_
S0=pw (years) (%) (%) (%)
ABF"~=aL 40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08)
E}Y!O"CAV Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10)
crqpV F]1] 50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15)
%1H[Wh(U Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24)
&{>
cZh}\ 60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0)
'SCidN(n Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7)
WOQP$D9 70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1)
{k>Ca Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9)
>H'4{| 80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3)
K%"5ImM Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8)
qp/v^$EA 90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0)
OlAs'TE^ Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0)
KMU4n-s"o Age-standardized
4G$|Rx[{, (95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0)
^~G8?]w aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2
A3|
Dz&@: their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27%
h v8P4"i v (26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared,
R(2tlZ 1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62).
+)j$|x~(A Outcomes of cataract surgery
Pm
lx8@D Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior
HR
;)|j{! cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were
>Y
#t`6,! left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular
PIH*Rw*GKZ lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular
$4tWI O lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact
BB~OqZIP posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of
Uc_'(IyO eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected
R,F[XI+=N visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43%
W6"v)Jc>_ of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes
qxFB%KqU (11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21,
IG|X!l P = 0.027).
fRtUvC-#H The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity
LM7$}#$R of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without
>p.O0G
gg cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract
]@uE#a:[ and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared,
9[m6Li 2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the
t?9v^vFR operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18
u>TZt]h8 (moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this
>TQH|}|6(y moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four
=|I>G?g- (15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these
\>CYC| four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction
B>GE9y5 and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one
&_"]5/"( had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract
hO';
{Nl/$ surgery.
Z\HX~*,6 DISCUSSION
z)9wXo#~ To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically
D3)zk@N assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract
" )V130< surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes
o>7
ts&rk of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual
Y=?yhAw Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and
L+CyQq high response rate have ensured that the study population is
Eh|]i;G% representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore,
3:8{"md@2 these data can be used to plan age-related cataract
ik!..9aB services throughout Australia.
tkXEHsRT We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age
mZx&Xez_G of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is
D<Zp!J1o significantly less than was reported in a number of previous
I
=1+h studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye
xia |+ Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract
Er{#ziN+ between studies because of different methodologies and
uPRQU+ cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well
*Mw_0Y as the different age structures of the study populations.
z,VD=Hnz Other studies have used less conservative definitions of
?c7*_<W
5 cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined.
KyzFnVH3) In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity
?}m']4p has not been included in the definition of cataract.
xCYE
B}o9r Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the
dlG=Vq&Y actual need for cataract surgery in the community.
jiYmb8Q4D 80 McCarty et al.
!>>f(t4 Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort
;\[(- )f!= Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total
@"o@}9=d (years) (%) (%) (%)
;>AL`M+ 40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81)
8P"_#M?! Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (
-CRQp1] 50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17)
P0$e~=Q^4 Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00)
IXb}AxBf 60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19)
\4
AM*lZ Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26)
#Jna6 70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1)
uio@r^Xz Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46)
8@PX7!9 80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4)
!xwG%{_ Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3)
Y2O"]phi@ 90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5)
\tRG1&{$% Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8)
rvyrxw%[ Age-standardized
B}eA\O4}I (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)
/l{&iLz[ Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract
_ib"b# surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected.
$
z$u{ Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81
#_B-4sm The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the
>+mD$:L Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude
F|&{Rt rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the
7y`}PMn crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%).
c)Ic#<e( However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains
gh>>Ibf Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban
C_ \q?> Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than
.>(Q)"v the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%,
zh$}~RG[ 95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in
Pub0IIs Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due,
;r/;m\V perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens
i%{3W:!4t implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio.
UYA_jpI P The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable
L.T?}o Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization,
!;Jmg states that cataract surgical services should be provided that
X]loJoM9 ‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and
}dxDtqb improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is
{}o>{&X not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted
O'GG Ti]e in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement
KvQ,;A in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We
-AYA~O(& found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction
3@n>*7/E had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have
\7z^!m shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this
kGkA:g: cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their
l/
y]nw current vision than participants without cataract or participants
3u>8\|8wz with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the
&t(0E:^TRU United States, researchers found that the change in patients’
_28<m
JfG ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their
]l~Vi_c vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to
!'=15&5@ their change in visual functioning score than to their change
z
NSu in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function
<As9>5|% has been shown to be associated with improvement in
a4gi,pz$] overall quality of life.22
._z'g_c( A recent review found that the incidence of visually
qW_u significant posterior capsule opacification following
k#}g,0@ cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36%
@^ ik[9^H capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated
~^)^q
8 with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear
wzjU,Mwe capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an
/q\_&@ opaque capsule.
Xj+q~4{|vt A number of studies have shown that the demand and
02AI%OOH timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity,
s,*c@1f? degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We
s|bM%!$1 have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more
$mA5@O~C5\ likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is
S06Hs~>Y employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7
Q}A=jew In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any
SKY*.IW/Z particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of
w-N1.^ having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care
ALd;$fd qf in Australia may explain the fact that people without
{Z{o"56f Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the
^b?2N/m@ USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated
;SKh with unoperated cataract in Australia.
B`#h{ )[ In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem
ekf$
dgoR in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract
HO|-@yOF^ surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will
":?T%v> increase further with the ageing of the population: the
^DAa%u number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in
QYE7p
\ the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well
r;cV&T/?
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes
S9Y[4*// of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good.
5a8>g
[2U These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract
msTB'0 surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for
s'a= _cN cataract extractions increases.
0^ !Gib ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
p_terD:
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants
_p
tP[SV^j from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the
udqge?Tz National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell
@
6xGJ,s Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and
Zy]s`aa the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient
-]"T^wib of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal
}#N]0I)JI Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital.
_3^y|_! REFERENCES
pz}mF D&[ 1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94.
$-pbw@7 Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17.
N7.
@FK 2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical,
3B18dv,V and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population
wa3F sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18.
LdTIR] 3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens
P1d,8~; opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated
m4**>!
I cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6.
:I/ 4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related
kO3`54 lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study.
i-13~Dk Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52.
KRk~w] 5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye
4]BJ0+|mT study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population
x0x $ 9 of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18:
rF8
hr 363–71.
/?3:X* 6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J.
PNmF}" Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye
UH40~LxIma Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8.
ec'tFL
#u{ 7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR.
&:auB:b Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient
8eww7k^R lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis.
uX0
Bp8P Sci. 1996; 37: S183.
N !IzB] 8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated
@.o@-3k variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J.
3:" &Z6t# Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22.
MgnE-6_c 9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too
%MNk4UsV many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal
j];G*-iv{ of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73:
QZ0R :TY 77–80.
62NkU)u 10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice
>nNl^ yqW style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates?
"i''Ui\H Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18.
J" wKR y 11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest
%#4 +! CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye
y {;u@o?T disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic
4g'}h`kh
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48.
LH.%\TMN$ 12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading
yI4DVu. of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81.
6'vi68 82 McCarty et al.
J;HkTT 13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley &
N.n1< Sons, 1977; 249–73.
EFv4=OWB 14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume
N=<=dp( II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International
5"e+& zU~f Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61.
QP<FCmt8 15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and
1::LN(`< Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997.
~RCg.&[ou 16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison
7>KQRLw of participants with non-participants in a populationbased
+|M{I= 8 epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment
$BaK'7=3* Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82.
AW62~* 17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the
fxOE]d8v Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health
DUQ9AT#3 Organization, 1997.
+yiU@K).0 18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO,
7NeDs$ Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation
n'Bmz on vision and physical function in elderly patients.
QWQ!Ak JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6.
4xp j< 19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of
"W3W:vl! Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative
RpU Lm1b outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures.
*qbRP"#[$ Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41.
3m3
EXz 20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated
.byc;9M% with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study.
` v>/
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31.
|E?
,xWN 21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract
j_(?=7Y3g surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and
a4:`2 personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5.
#0jSZ g^," 22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A.
ktU9LW~ Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to
?-4OfGN cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions.
QXsfp Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5.
B*32D8t`u 23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A
6|%^pjX5 systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule
=z+-l5Gu" opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21.
bJANZn|H 24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M.
8f|9W%jt Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health
+}&pVe\t Med. 1994; 16: 393–8.
gQu\[e%mVo 25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in
nR(#F 9 indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark,
XSD"/_xD Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract
rve7YS' Surgery Outcomes Study. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1998; 82: 1107–11.