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 t =ErJ  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes k\UDZ)TQV  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to )x1LOMe  
unoperated cataract in Australia. $~xY6"_}!!  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual ^lCys  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than #M;Cw}pW  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination <S'5`-&  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography Fv \yhR  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who U$R+&@;  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater UxZT&x3=)}  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or VU7x w  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. R9X* R3n B  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne ^J3\ U{B  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 "G\OKt'Z  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria q.6$-w  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract 'ojI_%9<  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had (;2J}XQvO~  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 LyM"  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber Ky33h 0TX  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber ,6Ulj+l  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated Q70LQCms  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or o*7`r~  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven 1A;>@4iC0  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate 5tMp@$F\{[  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery 1*aw~nY0  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% 2 F3U,}  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone s u]x  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an cx?t C#t  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision zmk#gk2H  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no .du FMJl  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural /7Z;/| oU  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance ZW\}4q;[A  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated p`ai2`qC`  
cataract.  u!TVvc  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is SS;[{u!  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced iXpLcHi  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of 4 %do.D*  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes !"{+|heU9p  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. s,Uc cA@  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health ).HYW _Yih  
services accessibility, prevalence V_*TY6  
INTRODUCTION bM`7>3 d7E  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in g:bw;6^ u  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all -z%| Jk  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate qI,4 uGg  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be |/B2Bm  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 FL -yt  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting VY }?Nb<&  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is =sVB.P  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in W ~sP7&sp  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists |1vi kG8  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather $7%e|0jC  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral F.:B_t  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has nY7 ZK  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for r@;n \  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has  )L}6to  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 &sJZSrk|  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is Y> }[c   
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the 5x";}Vp>P  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract P~Cx#`#(V  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence .H,v7L,~88  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors bnS"@^M  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to E:,V{&tLK  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. 8RS=Xemds  
METHODS V@6,\1#`|  
Study population 0'ha!4h3Z  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual "/v{B?~%!  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 "PO>@tY  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to dD _(MbTt  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. + k1|+z zS  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of 8 /3`rEW  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen pJ*x[y  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites 04eE\%?  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. $ f`\TKlN  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 o/uA_19  
Original Article 3\J-=U  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia pa1.+~)  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD ROZOX$XM  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia hdZ{8 rP  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, YcJZG|[  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au 7]}n 0*fe  
78 McCarty et al. 4L'dV  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural Gt9(@USK  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural EjZ_|Q  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify e C\;n  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a FbxrBM  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of nW1Obu8x|  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, 6.X| . N  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of RLuA^ONI  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. !RX7TYf  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local !L..I2'  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. i9KQpWG:  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian  U/v }4b  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. 4.?tP7UE  
Assessment of cataract zoFCHs r  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after :u}FF"j  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine {(o$? =  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the r*e<`Is  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using &O0@)jIV  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and ZHQa}C+  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on nP9zTa  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) Yv="oG!xL  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, BT?)-wS  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, sn.Xvk%75  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than J|vriI;  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to 'q+CL&D  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual r!DUsE  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, #0yU K5J  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. K,pQ11J  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to Xi^#F;@sU  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the e!+_U C  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight _*(n2' 2B  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the -Re4G78%  
analyses. x>Hg.%/c[  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., &y1 64xn'h  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in 5.1 c#rL  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. dd$}FlT  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman Rd4 z+G  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph y$J M=f$  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were e.8(t EqZ1  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera -F&4<\=+  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 ups] k?4  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately zOV.cI6fZz  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated DOk(5gR  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies zjuU*$A4  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were ^#^\@jLm  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, 5*Wo/%#q  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph G-vBJlt=t  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical hcQky/c\#b  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) UK{6Rh ;  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to 7'pmW,;  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. a{oG[e   
Assessment of risk factors :P!"'&gCL  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information `i'72\(  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 3hN.`G-E  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration 1WArgR  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, >?pWbL  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension BtPUUy.  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and {C% #r@6  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were `7f><p/q  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to dKKh^D`~  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants LF2@qvwD  
and use of vitamin supplements. `|{6U"n  
Data management and statistical analysis s>pOfXIx  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a IvW%n(a8^  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, f3g #(1  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or R a> k #pQ  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at fmDn1N-bG  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms hkK+BmMj\  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and CY"iP,nHl  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency 5BztOYn,  
checks were performed on the entire data set. ? iX1;c9  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was SO~]aFoYt  
employed for statistical analyses. u:6PAVW?  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific 5|4=uoA<  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to 0<,Q7onDD:  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five /Ir|& <yB  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates Ps0 g  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific &~%( RO  
data were weighted according to the 1996 L\:f#b~W  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the fs43\m4= m  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. %XpYiW#AK  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared wFgL\[$^|  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated wR x5` @  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted FMuakCic5  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the ?|&plf |  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. /7bIE!Cn  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically L>,j*a_[  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use P3due|4M  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The FY^#%0~  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment uSAb  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with 6{XdLI  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence HjX!a29Wf  
limits. c|kQ3(  
RESULTS V4('}Q!  
Study population b),_rr  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 W w{|:>j  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) 2EHeQ|#  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did :6^8Q,C1@  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was w|"cf{$^x  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as Kg#5 @;  
a whole.  Ji>  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to [n53 eC  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The J!%cHqR  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to \Ty%E<  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural *-!&5~o/U  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) ,W'?F9Y\  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. uq}>5  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery [5v[ Zqud  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases [@Db7]nG  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any >3S^9{d  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). %-Z0OzWe  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three IZ2c<B5&  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence x?ajTzMv  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes nDR)UR  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% qR W WG&  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract S?Y,sl+A:  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract N6GvzmG#g  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall zU+` o?al  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was 9s5PJj"u  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). DqLZc01>  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract x<  Td  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified 0G(T'Z1  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated uT5sLpA|6  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents =H'7g 6  
as information about risk factor exposure was not k^|P8v+"D  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed Kn]c4h}@b5  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence 4{d`-reHg  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic =[O;/~J%:  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a C+ B`A9  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use r?e)2l~C8j  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private 4v+4qyMyE  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, {DPobyvwFk  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. yqpb_h9  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the Ea%} VZ&[  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having Kt,ENbF  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract aqTMOWyeu  
surgery were not available. .\0PyV(  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate <r*A(}Y  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had [.}-nAN  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been )'{:4MX  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment ' LT6%<|  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant YuWsE4$  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression Xa._  
model. The factors that remained significantly related l\W[WQP h  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever Vi~9[&.E\!  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been ~eH+*U|\|M  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors mZVYgJQ[  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate L]o 5=K  
model. gB!K{ Io'  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract b??k|q  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with YadY?o./  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 Z9rs,_A  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort _ i )Z8#  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total pIh%5Z U  
(years) (%) (%) (%) 2nOoG/6 E  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) RHo|&.B;+  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) 6a G/=fq  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) iP1u u  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) EQ&E C  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) 8$!/Zg  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) `F:PWG`  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) CCJ!;d;&87  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) QKYGeT7&Y'  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) ruM16*S{=  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) 24 S,w>j  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) 'z\K0  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) |5SYKA7CS  
Age-standardized Lxm1.TOJ  
(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) mqGp]'{  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 {9KG06%+  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% iulM8"P  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, `Nnqdc2  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). Fl GKy9k  
Outcomes of cataract surgery fSdv%$;Hc  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior IMzhEm  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were GeN8_i[  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular dX0A(6  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular @W|}|V5  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact ; pdW7  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of vyT$IdV2  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected {{ M?+]p,^  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% F(/^??<5  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes J ?$4Yf  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, w5|az6wZB!  
P = 0.027). $53I%.  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity G8"L #[~  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without ;<%~g8:XL  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract $@q)IK%FDL  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, &O(z|-&| x  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the f+Nq?GvwBQ  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 iUqL /  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this ]t]s/;9]K  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four p_ =^E*J]  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these [|V<e+>T/  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction J=W"FEXTL7  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one R H^8"%\  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract +](^gaDw<L  
surgery. ?G+v#?A  
DISCUSSION u!mUUFl  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically -uN5 DJSW  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract 31k.{dnm  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes ;id0|x  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual U$6N-q  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and N54U [sy  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is Lllyx20U  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, SfQ ,uD6  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract >f4H<V-  
services throughout Australia. 828E^Q"<  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age YmFJlMK  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is FkR9-X<  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous Hb=4k)-/]  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye y^=\w?d  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract BdB/`X*  
between studies because of different methodologies and |/[?]`  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well V9NE kS  
as the different age structures of the study populations. 0Pu$1Fp  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of U)=?3}s(  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. 1XU sr;Wz  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity su>GeJiPW  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. U-#wFc2N  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the _C DUUr  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. XLz>h(w=  
80 McCarty et al. i&$L$zf,  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort yYwZZa1  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total IQf:aX  
(years) (%) (%) (%) p)RASIB  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) AK%`EsI^  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( CEq0ZL-W  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) uV`r_P  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) K[PH#dF5,x  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) R$k4}p  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) zMxHJNQ\D  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) ZH;VEX  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) ;D&FZ|`(u  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) <SGO+1zt p  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) DKnjmZ:J|  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) {D J!T  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) =7wI/5iN  
Age-standardized ?j9J6=2  
(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) =~6A c}$  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract / E}L%OvE  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. 3cfW|J  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 0F> ils  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the ej,j1iB  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude EKo!vie G  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the ui%B|b&&  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). kKL'rT6z  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains ^=`7]E[p  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban CC&opC  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than djJD'JL  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, F|pM$Kd`  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in |`vwykhezO  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, >L[n4x\  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens n'*4zxAA  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. ehCGu( =  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable 5"5!\Zo  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, ZD!?mR+-  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that HXV4E\JA  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and X.}i9a 6  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is jMUd,j`Opx  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted ;B*im S10  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement 'kBg3E$y  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We g{PEplk  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction >s dT=6v  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have n vzk P{  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this RT C;Wj  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their RvQa&r5l  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants rfo7\'yk  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the  T.d1?  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ Y#e,NN  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their '#<4oW\]  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to W*2d!/;7>  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change jD }G9=[$1  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function ?iXN..6x  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in Nyx)&T&I  
overall quality of life.22 [D%(Y ~2  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually [?>\]  
significant posterior capsule opacification following lcVZ 32MQ  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% |hl:!j.t  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated Wn%b}{9Fb  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear WuuF &0?8C  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an ;cEoc(<?  
opaque capsule. ,>p1:pga  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and 7Is:hx|:  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, WAt= T3  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We !S~0T!afF  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more Gf=3h4  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is ;rRV=$y  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 C4aAPkcp2$  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any -e4TqzRr  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of 9Iu"DOxX%  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care [H[L};%=j  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without xp?YM35  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the hmkm^2  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated !,|-{":  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. 72CHyl`|l  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem YK\pV'&+  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract q|{z9V<  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will QWc,JCu  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the uUiS:Tp]  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in Ht:\ z;cu  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well '}^qz#w   
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes b vOnS0,y  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. G@KDRv  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract ppo0DC\>  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for 0xx4rp H  
cataract extractions increases. "F =NDF  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Pr:\zI  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants &) 64:l&  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the .{t*v6(TP  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell {+m8^-T  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and Y7zs)W8xTT  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient #UE}JR3g  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal wfv\xHG  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. C1fd@6  
REFERENCES *u-$$@|y  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. eR,/} g\  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. }L( ZLt8Q  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, a4.w2GR  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population +HPcv u?1  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. Ph%{h"  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens 'pT13RFD  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated I(Qz%/Ox  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. eKy!Pai  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related t=X=",)f  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. UWnF2,<s;  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. M(nzJ  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye 8 R%<~fq r  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population m I5J] hk  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: IIih9I`IR  
363–71. ?QmtZG.$  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. `kJ)E;v;3  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye NTD1QJ  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. Wlxmp['Bh  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. p5$}h,7  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient 6`7tTn?n  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. mW4Cc1*  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. ,@c1X:  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated ;&n iZKoe  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. f*<Vq:N=\  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. "D8WdV(  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too /6Q]f  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal McN[  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: C{}PO u  
77–80. ,  + G  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice 6FNGyvBU  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? ` @  YV  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. e,epKtL  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest r ) x  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye e)wi}\:q_  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic ru@#s2  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. Sc]K-]1(H  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading |dLr #+'az  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. !Ztqh Xr  
82 McCarty et al. =4MTb_  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & &Gh0f"?  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. La )M  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume #0r~/gW  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International $ uHQl#!;  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. 9 Gd6/2  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and 84QOW|1  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. gMI%!Y  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison x6`mv8~9Db  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased -y-}g[`  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment ?{qUn8f2  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. e&;e<6l&{  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the !CUl1L1DSi  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health BDI@h%tJb:  
Organization, 1997. aO (PVS|P  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, u9"yU:1keb  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation zuLW'a6F-  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. OP1` !P y  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. qUd7O](b=?  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of #"4ioTL2  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative #@B"E2F  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. vW=-RTRH  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. xn3 _ ED  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated m`-);y  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. ~pRgTXbz  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. 5`.CzQVb  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract RRt( %Wm*  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and =:&xdphZ+  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. n{;Q"\*Sg  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A.  :Z Xd%  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to z ?\it(  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. op}!1y$9P  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. 45c?0tj  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A b)I-do+  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule rM7qBt  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. ]j3>=Jb;  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. M- ^I!C  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health X`D2w:  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. mw 28E\U  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in uxf,95<g)  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, dTg`z,^F  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract jo:Z  
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