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 W.-[ceM  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes X{9D fgW  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to ]"q)X{G(+  
unoperated cataract in Australia. P_z3TK  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual z\oq b) a  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than  |UZ#2  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination J1 a/U@"  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography S M@l4GH  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who tUGnD<P  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater gJ+MoAM"  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or Fm`hFBKW  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. WT;=K0W6&  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne KCe =$  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 zM|d9TS  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria ..Zuy|?w  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract %?<C ?.  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had ?#<Fxme  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 ES;7_ .q  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber Lf3Ri/@ p  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber j_L 'Ztu3  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated 9Y&n$svB  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or  w+=>b  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven hWJ\dwF  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate c;xL.  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery pT>[w1Kk^  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% TKx.`Cf m  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone g:dw%h  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an s_hf,QH  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision V9`VF O  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no vd|PTHV_  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural #|v\UJ:Pf/  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance S:v]3G  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated W#P)v{K  
cataract. UA!-YTh  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is \L}Soe'  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced !e?=I  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of |g;hXr#~  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes Y#V`i K  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. VE+Q Y9(  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health skh6L!6*<  
services accessibility, prevalence :;cKns0OA  
INTRODUCTION "a6[FqTs  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in - K0>^2hh  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all 3BAls+<p o  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate 0UB)FK ,9  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be ry\Nm[SQ  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 !f2f gX  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting OCnQSkj  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is Y #E/"x%+  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in KhIg  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists &m&Z^ CA  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather ]dHU  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral FloCR=^H  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has }enm#0Ha  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for m X{_B!j^  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has J,Du:|3o  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 v^1_'P AXu  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is ShbW[*5  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the FpN>T  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract pKJ0+mN #"  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence \CNv,HUm3  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors i}"Eu< P  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to }G}2Y (  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. HJWk%t<  
METHODS  =z`#n}v  
Study population Mhp6,JL  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual ~iI4v#0  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 ;}"!|  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to }GI8p* ]o=  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. Xy/lsaVskX  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of :Rl*64}  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen 6/e+=W2  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites v d A 3  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. =E$Hq4I  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 <4UF/G)  
Original Article 7HfA{.|m  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia <g9@iUOI  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD 4 :m/w!q$  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia )~@iM.}S2  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, X|] &K  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au l@C39VP  
78 McCarty et al. F&pJ faig  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural ^q{=mf`  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural wX?< o  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify A_nu:K-  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a 3pQ^vbQ"  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of 1= NP=ZB  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, ;F3#AO4(  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of #i6ZY^+ee  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. Owt|vceT  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local P[q`{TdV  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. WBOebv  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian { [S@+  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. N5]}m:"pk  
Assessment of cataract g+ZQ6Hz  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after b&iJui"7k  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine (}^Qo^Vr  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the )$Tcip`  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using -XcX1_  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and ;_]Z3  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on +#$(>6Zu"{  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) sD_"  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, R\VM6>SN'S  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, *d%U]Hby,  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than v8PH(d2{@  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to wfE%` 1  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual B%~D`[~?  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, Gd= l{~  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. 9gS.G2  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to Po+tk5}''5  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the CHZjK(a  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight T d6G u"  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the 3aK/5)4|B  
analyses. _jhdqON6E  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., A&dNCB  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in pbM"tr_A{  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. qUW>qi ,  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman Dq~PxcnI  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph g;M\4o  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were Nvef+L,v  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera TNvE26.(  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 I{V1Le4?  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately @|2}*_3\  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated e>oE{_e  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies _:tclBc8R  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were Ya_4[vR<  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, ~6hG"t]:  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph .QhH!#Y2D  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical B-OuBS,fwC  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) 0H V-e  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to BBg&ZIYEh  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. \sy;ca)[6g  
Assessment of risk factors 7 %P?3  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information (5"BKu1t  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 JMMsOA_]  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration ~YuRi#CTD:  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, J)l]<##  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension `R}D@  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and ;'Pi(TA)  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were kUJ\AK  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to \bh3&Z'.  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants ,{C(<1  
and use of vitamin supplements. VD \pQ.=  
Data management and statistical analysis |U_48  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a 7eh|5e$@  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, zS:89y<  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or (u]ajT  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at J! 4l-.-  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms }*n(RnCn  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and c;w~-7Q*|  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency Zq|oj^  
checks were performed on the entire data set. @1 #$  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was r +] J {k  
employed for statistical analyses. 4/{Io &|  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific iSx xy1R  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to 3zb;q@JV  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five VI%879Z\e  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates Rg&6J#h  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific laM0W5  
data were weighted according to the 1996 ?lb1K'(  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the *seKph+'c  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. -A9 !Y{Z  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared A.vcE  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated =JyYU*G4  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted   [E(DGt  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the ewgcpV|spn  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. u+s#Fee I  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically r2.87  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use !EM21Sc  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The JRA.,tQc  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment n<CJx+U  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with X r M[8a  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence !{s $V2_  
limits. ,-c(D-&  
RESULTS da!N0\.1T  
Study population ]Vl5v5_  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 D{.%Dr?  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) q) /;|h  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did ACl:~7;  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was Lj(hk @  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as A>>@&c:(  
a whole. P xpz7He  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to AXPUJ?V  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The <l wI|<  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to yc]ni.Hz  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural ~JLqx/[|s  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) ,l; &Tb=k  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. D{'Na5(  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery f,M$>!$V  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases bvG").8$  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any #yr19i ?  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). Y[s   
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three s 7xRry  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence &1Cq+YpI  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes 7=QV^G  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% n#J$=@  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract &@+K%qW[e  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract M8cLh!!  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall oSa FmP  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was )7j"OE  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). n;Iey[7_E`  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract p Hg8(ru|  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified TdQ^^{SRp  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated !%s7I ^f*  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents mu{%%b7|^  
as information about risk factor exposure was not 5\4>H6  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed 'E&K%/d  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence l?FNYvL  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic s}z,{Y$-t  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a ~36c0 =  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use q!ZmF1sU  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private w x,;  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, OT *W]f  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. $Ilr.6';  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the bZG$ biq  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having bs`/k&'  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract h{JVq72R  
surgery were not available. F Q k;  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate }jk^M|Z"Oz  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had >b$<lo  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been EV(/@kN2  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment ^CE:?>a$  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant b,`\"'1  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression C {,d4KG  
model. The factors that remained significantly related *FE<'+%  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever *7vPU:Q[  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been 2k gm)-z  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors 5 O6MI4:  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate <5#e.w  
model. <'B^z0I,  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract -)Vj08aP  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with Aa Ma9hvT!  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 ( 0h]<7  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort y5ExEXa  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total (j /O=$mJ  
(years) (%) (%) (%) FV9RrI2  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) xV6j6k  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) ,]Ma ,2  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) [K KoEZ  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) k$2Y)  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) hJ@nW5CI  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) DXGO-]!!0  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) $d=lDN  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) D5p22WY  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) gkdjH8(2  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) LQjqwsuN{  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) E*l"uV  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) ivq4/Y] -X  
Age-standardized >']H)c'2  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) 7ou^wt+%  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 9s)oC$\  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% 'FhnSNT(4=  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, e'Pa@]VaC  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). c>SeOnf  
Outcomes of cataract surgery W#[!8d35$  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior rBf?kDt6l  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were i@* ^]'  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular !iw 'tHhR  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular Exr 7vL  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact % 8Z,t+'  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of 7yp*I[1Qf>  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected ) YFs  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% Q Y'-]  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes K5SO($  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, hbeC|_+   
P = 0.027). ho1F8TG=  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity Ub,unU  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without umzYJ>2t  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract |BW,pT  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, G$ FBx  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the 7&4,',0VL  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 WIm7p1U#V  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this cy4'q ?r  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four N+5 ^h(~  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these F6p1 VFs  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction h86={@Le  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one F]YKYF'1I  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract M-N2>i#  
surgery. fP58$pwu  
DISCUSSION : qRT9n$  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically KU,w9<~i(  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract K*$#D1hG  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes $0T"YC%  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual 31& .L nq  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and Kdu\`c-lB  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is A@(h!Cq  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, .To:tN#  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract Y&+_p$13  
services throughout Australia. dM{~Ubb  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age $?AA"Nz  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is )C]&ui~1  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous  /;6@M=6u  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye m,C,<I|'d  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract _`i%9Ad.4  
between studies because of different methodologies and m\M+pjz  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well $'YKB8C  
as the different age structures of the study populations. WwtE=od  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of 9zYiG3 d  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. 7G(f1Y  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity 6F.7Ws <  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. 1]Q 2qs  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the 9<h]OXv  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. s%[GQQ-N  
80 McCarty et al. Q&7)vs  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort $n Sh[ {  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total M#V C3h$  
(years) (%) (%) (%) a T:AxYn8  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) z<%g #bo  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( : q64K?X  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) dM s||&|&  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) AXP`,H  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) 'nWs0iH.  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) Zxc7nLKF~  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) 4 %)N(%u  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) N^ s!!Sbpq  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) n5+S"  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) @>fO;*  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) 4[#6<Ixf  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) kg: uGP9  
Age-standardized &^7uv0M<y  
(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) }\f(qw  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract QGr\I/Y  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. i&pJg 1  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 B3 dA%\'  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the #PslrA. E  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude 8wX+ZL: 9  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the cK[R1 ReH  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). h41$|lonU%  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains c.(Ud`jc  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban G(As%r]  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than " *w)puD  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, ]l=O%Ev  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in F?b'L JS  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, 6Z(*cf/s  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens 5#0A`QO   
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. #vj#! 1  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable G@!_ZM8h  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, )W8L91-  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that 5pRY&6So  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and ImWXzg3@{  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is ! Ea&]G  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted xH<'GB)  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement / R_ u\?k(  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We CKv&Re  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction 4%wq:y< )/  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have f?%qUD_#  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this k> b&xM !  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their 61/)l0 <;  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants 8[{|xh(  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the ^|wT_k\  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ <S]KaDu^  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their ?}vzLgp  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to lPY@{1W  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change aS,a_b ]  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function K`hz t  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in $ !v}xY  
overall quality of life.22 3az$:[Und}  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually  ispkj'  
significant posterior capsule opacification following 7}Bj|]b)~  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% 3brb*gI_b  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated i90}Xyt  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear >SvDgeg_7f  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an :.#z  
opaque capsule. bA}Z0a  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and k, f)2<  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity,  *p=fi  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We =HVfJ"vK  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more dFQ o  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is !"Q b}g  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 5MxH)~VQoM  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any ! .AhzU1%Y  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of =_[2n?9y  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care !\^jt%e&  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without Q!yb16J  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the %tV3 2l=  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated 6B#('gxO  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. L\YKdUL  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem ; 7rd;zJ  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract -0$:|p?@^  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will ' WQdr (  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the D*\v0=P'?  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in /s:w^ g~  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well Kq&qE>Ju  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes kn}z gSO  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. EUy(T1Cl&&  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract O| I+],  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for aG(hs J)  
cataract extractions increases. wK ? @.l)u  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS O$qtq(Q%  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants WuM C^  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the i@5 )` <?  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell ZQAO"huk]  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and fN)x#?  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient s\gp5MT  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal :g2  }C  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. X*F_<0RC1  
REFERENCES v vq/  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. #f{lC0~vA  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. \\:|Odd  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, r\2vl8X~  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population N u^p  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. $wV1*$1NM  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens rp's  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated j*400  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. aD9q^EoEs  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related Gb2L }  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. ST Z]8cw  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. #.._c?%4/  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye 0[T,O,y  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population 6w| J -{2  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: #%$28sxB  
363–71. kn"q:aD  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. epg#HNP7^Y  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye 6C [E  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. f>polxB%N  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. Lrd[O v  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient ,"\@fwy{  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. xY<{qHcX  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. n,$z>  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated M.q=p[  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. J00VTb`  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. -/P\"c  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too X4|4QgY  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal -0C@hM,wm  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: lpB3&H8&  
77–80. 2]cRXJ7h  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice 4_/?:$KO  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? hk[ %a$Y  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. 72W s K"  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest tDg}Ys=4K>  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye oU*45B`"  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic r|u MovnV  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. 'o_:^'c  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading ,Wbwg  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. s$D ^>0  
82 McCarty et al. /U&Opo {aO  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & }7E^ZZ]f  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. o1cErI&q"  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume j>-gO,v, y  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International q@t0NvNSu  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. Qv,"($n\  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and y){ k3lm0  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. 0j"8@<  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison '(bgs   
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased [I!6PGx  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Y2o?gug  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. 1cS}J:0P  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the (q+)'H%iK  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health S}p4iE"n  
Organization, 1997. /x_o!<M  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, 4RSHZAJg  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation h$4Hw+Yxs]  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients.  A) ;  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. %3NqSiMs  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of ):i&`}SY  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative .pvi!NnL-  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. yKYTi3_(  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. xx[9~z=d  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated sCR67/  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study.  IiY/(N+J  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. Z .92y  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract 5$V_Hj  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and 0NS<?p~_S  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. xuqv6b.  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A.  ,%uo6%  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to E[/\7 v\  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. 6@rMtQfI  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. :A/d to  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A 7=;R& mqC  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule _f$^%?^  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. BO;6 u^[  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. Wf|Q$MHos  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health \O2Rhz  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. x[a<mk  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in 7pe\M/kl  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, R%?9z 8-  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract kqFP)!37  
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