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 Ln:6@Ok)5%  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes GsIVx !  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to [wU e"{  
unoperated cataract in Australia. T_R2BBT v  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual /2^"c+/'p  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than )5T82=[h<  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination fi%)520  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography YI+ clh;%9  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who Q^\m@7O :  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater V>Dqw!  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or W(pq_H'  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. ) >;7"v  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne Ri>4:V3K  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 T@wgWE<0y_  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria Q":,oZ2  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract :@uIEvD?  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had vf&_ N  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 W4;/;[/L  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber IR2=dQS  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber fj|b;8_}l  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated pfBe24q  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or F f{,zfN+3  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven K| dI'TnW  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate cY5w,.Q/!  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery z$gtGrU  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% l+#J oc<8  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone X+1Mv  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an rD+mI/_J`  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision [#=IKsO'R6  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no W#)X@TlE  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural 0G31Kou  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance b wM?DY  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated C}#$wge  
cataract. ^T:L6:  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is ^@3,/dH1 t  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced It7R}0Smg  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of k#bG&BF  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes @@j:z;^|  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. ua"2nVxK_K  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health PB *v45  
services accessibility, prevalence )s,LFIy<A  
INTRODUCTION Nm !~h|3  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in )X;051Q  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all 2}=@n*8*d  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate hxzA1s%~  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be ,-hbwd~M  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 ,{mv6?_  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting c<,LE@ V  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is =&6sU{j*  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in obE8iG@H  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists WW.@&#S5  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather =\_gT=tZ  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral !ej]'>V,X  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has j g//I<D  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for ]Zt]wnL+  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has PWZd<  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 =6qTz3t  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is #M{qMJHDo  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the e@qH!.g)  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract ] +46r!r|  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence WPkKbF  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors z~X /.>  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to g9q}D-  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. CvmIDRP*  
METHODS [nZIV  
Study population BGBHA"5fz  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual JLnv O  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 GLyPgZ`|  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to 4MS#`E7LrC  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. ? "r=08  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of *Q^ z4UY  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen E0R6qS:'  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites _<LL@ IX  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. A $gn{ c  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 w+>+hq  
Original Article <|4$T H^ t  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia t$z[ ja=  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD sde>LZet/  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia A$3Rbn}"  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, GM0Q@`d  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au P2a5<#_|  
78 McCarty et al. s@ r{TXEn  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural Q0Ft.b  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural 3{$7tck,  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify 8^>c_%e}  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a &jHsFS  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of \~ChbPnc  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, 'ZW(Hjrd  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of Mg.%&vH\  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. nf0u:M"fm  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local )pH+ibR  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. *z?Uh$I4  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian 3NgXM  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. FKTF?4+\U  
Assessment of cataract >\ Dy  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after k0e}`#t  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine N s+g9+<A  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the 0I)$!1~O)  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using '\I(n|\  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and ]=00<~ l*q  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on y ("WnVI  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) 'q-q4 QCB  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, N&NBn(  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, eWcqf/4?"  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than 4k;FZo]S  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to &u.{]Yjx  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual <?nIO  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, Y<xqws  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. UphTMyn3  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to DXiA4ihr=  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the m^D'p  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight exb} y  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the pLB2! +  
analyses. egaX[ j r  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., :jiuu@<  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in Sa= tiOv  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. G(&[1V%x  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman 0\dmp'j]  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph l_^OdQ9D  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were E]@&<TFq  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera u\*9\ G  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 UBaXS_c\  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately A[Mke  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated z#tIa  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies YN8x|DLi?  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were U]3!"+Y1P  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, L`+[mX&2B  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph ],]Rv#`  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical pR S!  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) -r\jIO_  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to 6 4_}"fU  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. #1<m\z7l  
Assessment of risk factors gu k,GF9p]  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information \dk1a  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 hfwJZ\_60  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration W:r[o%B  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, WcN 4ff-  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension S2$E`' J  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and pv]@}+<Dt  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were ;(NTzBq!1  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to 'LYDJ~  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants '.|}  
and use of vitamin supplements. lx`?n<-X  
Data management and statistical analysis SyL"Bmi  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a O/~T+T%  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, b^W&-Hh  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or .eJKIck  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at K$S0h-?9]O  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms c~T {;  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and 392V\qtS  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency wkt4vE87  
checks were performed on the entire data set. x^y$pr  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was A;U c&G  
employed for statistical analyses. #aqnj+  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific BbB3#/g  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to  <$nPGz)}  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five 3U6QYD55]]  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates A+/Lt>+AS  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific Z_ElLY  
data were weighted according to the 1996 u$w.'lK  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the R&uPoY,f  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. +C=vuR  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared 0hS&4nW  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated xbiprhdv  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted B} qRz  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the . r/s.g  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. v=^^Mr"Z^  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically GVT 6cR  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use uNf'Zeo  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The (0`rfYv5.R  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment Qe~C}j%  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with 2K~v`c*4  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence ceg\lE:8  
limits. ?3DL .U{  
RESULTS 0,0WdJAe  
Study population DvW Bvs,  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 2-S}#S}2C  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) Va[&~lA)  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did "4XjABJ4'  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was # l1*#Z  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as ,,FhE  
a whole. Ds=d~sNu  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to aaVq>$G 3  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The P w6l'  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to D[T\ _3 W  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural , -])[ u  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) oKRI2ni$j9  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. *4 m]UK  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery axG%@5  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases 1% @i4  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any "<oR.f=0  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). o &b\bK%E  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three Kj"n Id)  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence sVO|Ghy65  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes QIwO _[Q  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% {s@&3i?ZiC  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract D<Z\6)|%I  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract @&h_+|:-  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall \KEmfCx'n  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was zll?/|%  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). 5"#xbvRS0H  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract nQw, /L k  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified AWZ4h,as{  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated Ud-c+, xX  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents [c>YKN2qa  
as information about risk factor exposure was not ,=6;dT  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed uN&49o  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence P\X$fD  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic B3u:D"t  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a *xKY>E+  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use E-rGOm" m  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private xqVIw!J?/}  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, H|N,nkhH}  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. X{5(i3?S  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the C It@xi#I  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having 7baQ4QY?n  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract CwzDkr&QC_  
surgery were not available. 6$+F5T  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate /vPcg  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had ^paM{'J\\)  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been ^X?3e1om  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment "Kn%|\YL@4  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant X04JQLhy"  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression 8z"*CJ@  
model. The factors that remained significantly related ~LN {5zg  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever a^GJR]] {  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been =I9RM9O<  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors }Ias7d?re  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate OM7EmMa;  
model. 64-;| k4F  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract @ **]o  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with vq JjAls  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 kEM|;&=_  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort z0-`D.D@\  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total  [E|%  
(years) (%) (%) (%) LYyOcb[x  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) C.;H?So(  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) 3rw<#t;v  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) ;sn]Blpq  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) dBMr%6tz  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) "_T8Km008  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) +(3U_]Lu  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) Z]1jg>")  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) f& >[$zh  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) Gg=Y}S7:  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) S 7 *LV;  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) \bPSy0  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) Wc q UF"A  
Age-standardized E1-BB  
(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) TmIw?#q^  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 ?m>! P@ M  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% m]#oZVngy  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, qTUyax  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). HJeZm  
Outcomes of cataract surgery #.^A5`k  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior ic(`Ev  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were (B:+md\Q  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular 85GU~.  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular K{WLo5HP  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact 4V9S~^v|  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of 6./3w&D;  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected T>2_r6;  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% waI:w,  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes e;G}T%W  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, Yg kd1uI.  
P = 0.027). vlS+UFH0  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity b>Em~NMu_  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without bs9X4n5  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract 8.m9 =+)8  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, f\U(7)2  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the #M~6A^)  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 UHT2a9rG  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this \\UOpl  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four a 0+W-#G  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these 3F ]30  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction DO{Lj# @  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one f~?4  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract +Cg[!6[#  
surgery. %-J} m  
DISCUSSION )N'rYS' 9  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically PyQ P K,  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract * ,#SwZ  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes ' |Ia-RbX  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual mP[ZlS~"  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and NPjNkpWm&=  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is 'S#D+oF(1~  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, f)#rBAkt  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract |B~^7RHXo  
services throughout Australia.  Xn=  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age s )9d\{  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is Bh ,GQHJ  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous bBg=X}9  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye Cr>YpWm  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract *w5xC5*  
between studies because of different methodologies and y)uxj-G  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well o_R_  
as the different age structures of the study populations. ZWXA%u7V  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of 8d1r#sILI  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. ESi'3mbeC  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity ?M9?GodbP.  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. HIsB)W&%@  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the K.r "KxCm|  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. J7FzOwd1h  
80 McCarty et al. UiQF4Uc"  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort [oD u3Qn  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total Y>Ju$i  
(years) (%) (%) (%) Bv{DZ?{s  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) u#)ARCx,w  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( ;/ ASl<t,  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) a?1Ml>R6P  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) vM?jm! nd  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) 5ggsOqH  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) w^E$R  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) p5`={'>-  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) P-?R\(QYtR  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) TrR=3_;.7  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) K+3+?oYKH  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) "@(Sw>*o  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) K;l xPM]  
Age-standardized pSdtAv  
(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) -)9aY.  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract cceh`s=cU  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. :wY(</H  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 |Ng}ZLBM  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the nO `R++  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude ")i_{C,b^  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the x:iLBYf  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). n+D93d9LP  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains ;( [^+_/  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban D]?yGI_  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than 1eOQ;#O V  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, #n.XOet<\  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in ->)0jZax  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, j7yUya&  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens NeR1}W  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. `%_(_%K  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable K$c?:?wmo  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, ODKHI\U  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that n'8 3P%x  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and <lP5}F87  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is KZ 4G"  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted G]T&{3g-.  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement 7`HKa@  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We JZ)w  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction Ww =ksggpB  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have ]SUW"5L-  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this / >O.U?  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their Lklb  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants WDF6.i ?  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the -IS$1  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ ;R7+6  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their y4,t=Gq7^  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to zKFiCP K  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change VLC=>w\,  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function rTzXRMv@o  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in >S@><[C  
overall quality of life.22 K_-S`-eH  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually +T HBPEq  
significant posterior capsule opacification following X4/3 vY  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% y<m }dW6[\  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated bdj')%@n  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear oT- Y  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an NW~`oc)NS  
opaque capsule. t8uaNvUM}e  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and $u, ~183  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, !=]cAS PGD  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We */j[n$K>~`  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more 5 ~YaXh^  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is ad`7[fI  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 ?zK\!r{  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any qjH/E6GGg  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of \i As  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care j=Z;M1  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without nxs'qX(D  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the DYTC2  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated y)T|1)  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. CUx [LZR7m  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem Q\aC:68  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract 3u4P [   
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will Ha~} NO  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the R?8/qGSVqJ  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in ?:#$btmn?  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well -fDW>]_  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes ]EEac  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. \8]("l}ms8  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract }h=3[pe}  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for Nh+Xlg XG  
cataract extractions increases. O[R   
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS [ip}f4K  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants J:0`*7  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the a t%qowt  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell 9Qn*frdY,  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and 6IKi*}  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient goc"+ K  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal _q`f5*Z[  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. jNW/Biy4u  
REFERENCES ]9~6lx3/  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. VX e7b  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. Hf9F:yH  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, cTL W}4m%g  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population /086qB|  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. &\<?7Qj3U|  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens #A^(1  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated K(Ak+&[  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. ^'$P[  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related ykNPKzW:  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. t8t+wi!  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. EN)0b,ax  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye =7 -@&S=?s  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population #LfoG?k1K  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: ;a`I8Fj  
363–71. w'<"5F`  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. 9/6=[)  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye nH|7XY9"  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. }RZN3U=  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR.  Kl w9  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient Og(|bs!6  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. jU=n\o=?  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. S&F  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated {S5j;  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. &#<>fT_  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. w>6 cc#>q  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too \Wf1b8FW  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal ] F2{:RW  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: +XL|bdK  
77–80. SJ8|~,vL  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice Vi<F@ji  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? #\gx.2W7  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. GA2kg7  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest |/O_AnG I  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye 9M1UkS$`@  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic vABUUAo!Jr  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. Oq*=oz^~1  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading 5ii:93Hlj  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. KU (g Zy  
82 McCarty et al. lIgAc!q(  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & TV*@h2C"i  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. 28 7)\FU;3  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume e\ ' =#Hw  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International 8 J;\Z  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. Kp%:\s,lO  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and NLF 6O9  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. fkJElO-F  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison [ .c'22R6  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased XcM.<Dn3  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment QW_W5|_  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. @]X5g8h  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the b]@@x;v$@  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health b]Z>P{ j  
Organization, 1997. p _q ]Rt  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, >PoVK{&y  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation CyD)=e {  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. {x<yDDIv_  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. B dKD%CJ[  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of fE,Io3  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative j=n <s</V  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. f' %Pkk  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. a474[?  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated )jHH-=JM  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. J0,;F9<C#X  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. 52#Ac;Y  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract (V9 ;  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and SRek:S,  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. o2W^!#]=  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. #0'%51Jcl  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to BSHtoD@e7  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. %#iu  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. JpC_au7CX  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A  7 j8Ou3  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule -&JQdrs  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. p^*A&7d:P  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. Qkb=KS%z  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health ]1&} L^a  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. M}x]\#MMY  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in G*%:"qleT$  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, #VynADPs`o  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract OmLe+,7'  
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:
5+2=? 正确答案:7
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交