Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology
tx<^P
V2 2006;
tpA-IL?KQw 34
d]|K%<+( : 880–885
7n84`|= doi:10.1111/j.1442-9071.2006.01342.x
pO)EYla9 © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
N\tFK*U^I ;?iu@h Correspondence:
_\k?uUo&,^ Dr Garry Brian, 5 Hazelmere Parade, Sherwood, Qld 4075, Australia. Email:
grbrian@tpg.com.au 7O|`\&RYR Received 11 April 2006; accepted 19 June 2006.
^4]=D nd% Original Article
Io
IhQ Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea
29G el Jambi N Garap
G!C }ULq MMed(Ophthal)
)n9,?F#l ,
NM:$Q<n 1,2
32aI0CT Sethu Sheeladevi
[x,
`)Fk MHM
0>-}c> ,
\X(*JNQ 3
zXlerQWUv Garry Brian
sb_/F
E5e FRANZCO
-\%5aXr ,
J1gnR 2,4
J_yXL7d BR Shamanna
]i,o+xBKH MD
$Q'LDmot ,
K7{B!kX4k 3
6; )5v Praveen K Nirmalan
zNo"P[J8 MPH
Fo;J3<U) 3
* Z)j"i and Carmel Williams
{!?M!/d MA
QH7 GEj] 4
S"^'ksL\ 1
sieC7raO The Fred Hollows Foundation – Papua New Guinea Eye Care Program,
w3b?i89 2
>y#qn9rV1 Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine and Health
eYkg4 O' Sciences, University of Papua New Guinea, Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea;
S{MB$JA 3
87S,6 Y International Center for Advancement of Rural Eye Care,
[%6) L.V. Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India; and
w03Ur4>T 4
\=|=
(kt) The Fred Hollows Foundation (New Zealand), Auckland, New Zealand
iY,oaC~?"N Key words:
/ET+`=n blindness
#E\6:UnT ,
'T qF}a7 cataract
b9T6JS j ,
_):@C:6 Papua New Guinea
`@,Vbn^_ ,
}C/+zF6q surgery
O<@L~S] ,
l:/x&=w vision impairment
=;I+:K .
s?9Y3]&+&M I
o>yXEg NTRODUCTION
Mty[)+se Just north of Australia, tropical Papua New Guinea (PNG)
8*B+@` has more than five million people spread across several major
P&:[pPG and hundreds of other smaller islands. Almost 50% of the
EDnZ/)6Gg land area is mountainous, and 85% of inhabitants are rural
'q}f3u > dwellers. Forty per cent of the population is age 14 years or
`*kl> }$ younger, and 9% is 50 years or older.
JwWxM3(%t 1
9CN'29c Papua New Guinea was administered by Australia until
[[N${ C 1975, when independence was granted. Since that time, governance,
PVljb=8F particularly budgetary, economic performance, law
[^/a`Kda8 and justice, and development and management of basic
9O Y ao health and other services have declined. Today, 37% of the
yFd942 population is said to live below the poverty line, personal
!
jDopE0L and property security are problematic, and health is poor.
yUxz,36wZ There are significant and growing economic, health and education
N@!PhP disparities between urban and rural inhabitants.
Q uw|KL Papua New Guinea has one referral hospital, in Port
4Xt`L"f Moresby. This has an eye clinic with one part-time and two
CM[83> full-time consultant ophthalmologists, and several ophthalmology
E
GZiWBr training registrars. There are also two private ophthalmologists
Lg#(?tMp,' in the city. Elsewhere, four provincial hospitals
\\Q){\S have eye clinics, each with one consultant ophthalmologist.
C6@*l~j One of these, supported by Christian Blind Mission and
kr
|k \ based at Goroka, provides an extensive outreach service.
Hfo<EB2Y9N Visiting Australian and New Zealand ophthalmology teams
D~M R)z_p~ and an outreach team from Port Moresby General Hospital
hy$VG%b;# provide some 6 weeks of provincial service per year.
-O-?hsV)y Cataract and its surgery account for a significant proportion
)<_qTd0` of ophthalmic resource allocation and services delivered
|m@>AbR5dk in PNG. Although the National Department of Health keeps
l]&x~K} some service-related statistics, and cataract has been considered
&o1k_!25 in three PNG publications of limited value (two district
)"6"g9A service reports
hH%fWB2( 2,3
hJir_= and a community assessment
MLmaA3 4
$MfRw ), there has
v*<rNZI been no systematic assessment of cataract or its surgery.
.
P?n<n# A
[/ertB BSTRACT
aD_7^8> Purpose:
@M'qi=s* To determine the prevalence of visually significant
Q&^\YgkCf cataract, unoperated blinding cataract, and cataract surgery
w1VYU> for those aged 50 years and over in Papua New Guinea.
Y>
}\'$\b Also, to determine the characteristics, rate, coverage and
Z5)v outcome of cataract surgery, and barriers to its uptake.
V
d]7v Methods:
WXDo`_
{R Using the World Health Organization Rapid
U0{)goN. Assessment of Cataract Surgical Services protocol, a population-
hdSP#Y'- based cross-sectional survey was conducted in
^W@%(,xb 2005. By two-stage cluster random sampling, 39 clusters of
8ZM#.yBB 30 people were selected. Each eye with a presenting visual
SBDGms acuity worse than 6/18 and/or a history of cataract surgery
-p>1:M < was examined.
3G2iRr.
o Results:
6%>'n? Of the 1191 people enumerated, 98.6% were
`NEi/jB examined. The 50 years and older age-gender-adjusted
*p#@W-:9E prevalence of cataract-induced vision impairment (presenting
J]{<Z?% acuity less than 6/18 in the better eye) was 7.4% (95%
YPNW%N!$| confidence interval [CI]: 6.4, 10.2, design effect [deff]
hlze]d?z =
S?C.: 1.3).
op9vz[o#4 That for cataract-caused functional blindness (presenting
I.T?A9Z acuity less than 6/60 in the better eye) was 6.4% (95% CI:
:l1-s] 5.1, 7.3, deff
KRcB_( =
j6XHH&ZEb 1.1). The latter was not associated with
CYwV]lq:s gender (
}HmkTk P
yg*
#~, =
Gau@RX:O 0.6). For the sample, Cataract Surgical Coverage
d
ePk}Sn at 6/60 was 34.5% for Eyes and 45.3% for Persons. The
7wPI)]$ Cataract Surgical Rate for Papua New Guinea was less than
T6=|)UTe1 500 per million population per year. The age-genderadjusted
QJrXn6` prevalence of those having had cataract surgery
C<I?4WM was 8.3% (95% CI: 6.6, 9.8, deff
Jvsy
6R =
^"54Q^SH 1.3). Vision outcomes of
Haekr*1% surgery did not meet World Health Organization guidelines.
\ERxr
Lack of awareness was the most common reason for not
{B
k` Zlki seeking and undergoing surgery.
i$@xb_ Conclusion:
0a8\{(w Increasing the quantity and quality of cataract
/HhA2 (g% surgery need to be priorities for Papua New Guinea eye
&|ne!wu care services.
q0Q[]|L Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 881
"5
~{ © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
'PY; This paper reports the cataract-related aspects of a population-
_|0# based cross-sectional rapid assessment survey of
R.HvqO those 50 years and older in PNG.
<3@nv% M
ol/@)k^s> ETHODS
)$9wKk\F The National Ethical Clearance Committee of The Medical
SM
RKEPwp& Research Advisory Committee granted ethics approval to
,&=7ir14>R survey aspects of eye health and care in Papua New Guinea
[m
h>N$ (MRAC No. 05/13). This study was performed between
|gP) lR December 2004 and March 2005, and used the validated
l9=Ka{$^* World Health Organization (WHO) Rapid Assessment of
3!gz^[!?EN Cataract Surgical Services
Tc||96%2
^ 5,6
)z@
+|A protocol. Characterization of
z[QDJMt> cataract and its surgery in the 50 years and over age group
#xu1
eX0< was part of that study.
.*njgAq7 As reported elsewhere,
$poIWJM c 7
{Hl(t$3V` the sample size required, using a
<@ ts[p. prevalence of bilateral cataract functional blindness (presenting
v@[3R7|4 visual acuity worse than 6/60 in both eyes) of 5% in the
x/M$_E<G target population, precision of
vvxD}p=y ±
PDA9.b<q0 20%, with 95% confidence
9(S=0< intervals (CI), and a design effect (deff) of 1.3 (for a cluster
.txtt?ZF2 size of 30 persons), was estimated as 1169 persons. The
@^ YXE
, sample frame used for the survey, based on logistics and
{[Ri:^nHgL security considerations, included Koki wanigela settlement
"'Fvt-<^S7 in the Port Moresby area (an urban population), and Rigo
JB'tc!!* coastal district (a rural population, effectively isolated from
_oBx:G6E Port Moresby despite being only 2–4 h away by road). From
UF5_be,D this sample frame, 39 clusters (with probability proportionate
>m1b/J3# to population size) were chosen, using a systematic random
Ar/P%$Zfq sampling strategy.
44P [P{y Within each cluster, the supervisor chose households
,=Wj*S)~ using a random process. Residency was defined as living in
dZ(Z]`L,B that cluster household for 6 months or more over the past
,WOCG2h year, and sharing meals from a common kitchen with other
!=.y[Db= members of the household. Eligible resident subjects aged
e> 9
X 50 years and older were then enumerated by trained volunteers
l6WEx
-d from the Port Moresby St John Ambulance Services.
PV"\9OIKb. This continued until 30 subjects were enrolled. If the
2Q@na@s required number of subjects was not obtained from a particular
db1ZNw cluster, the fieldworkers completed enrolment in the
uQ[,^Ee&/ nearest adjacent cluster. Verbal informed consent was
}15&<s obtained prior to all data collection and examinations.
^vG<Ma.yk A standardized survey record was completed for each
~s'}_5;VY participant. The volunteers solicited demographic and general
:EHk]Hkz
information, and any history of cataract surgery. They
g]z k` R5 also measured visual acuity. During a methodology pilot in
W%^!<bFk}m the Morata settlement area of Port Moresby, the kappa statistic
o!+'<IQ' for agreement between the four volunteers designated
#M
w70@6 to perform visual acuity estimations was over 0.85.
JiXE {( The widely accepted and used ‘presenting distance visual
o ?05bv acuity’ (with correction if the subject was using any), a measure
#| gh of ocular condition and access to and uptake of eye care
xh#_K@ 8 services, was determined for each eye separately. This was
/O.q4p done in daylight, using Snellen illiterate E optotypes, with
KV;q}EyG four correct consecutive or six of eight showings of the
;t9_*)[ smallest discernible optotype giving the level. For any eye
\oxf_4X with presenting visual acuity worse than 6/18, pinhole acuity
8irTGA was also measured.
R'B_YKHBY An ophthalmologist examined all eyes with a history of
m !<FlEkN cataract surgery and/or reduced presenting vision. Assessment
^5~x*=_ of the anterior segment was made using a torch and
='kCY}dkO loupe magnification. In a dimly lit room, through an undilated
p%bMfi*T pupil, the status of the visually important central lens
&*O'qOO<2 was determined with a direct ophthalmoscope. An intact red
P;gd!Yl<- reflex was considered indicative of a ‘normal’ clear central
d<OdQvW. lens. The presence of obvious red reflex dark shading, but
N&k\X]U transparent vitreous, was recorded as lens opacity. Where
#H Jlm1d present, aphakia and pseudophakia with and without posterior
X5+^b({ capsule opacification were noted. The lens was determined
wt@TR~a to be not visible if there were dense corneal opacities
@0H0!9' or other ocular pathologies, such as phthisis bulbi, precluding
h1 "# any view of the lens. The posterior segment was examined
tNZZCdB with a direct ophthalmoscope, also through an
8VG~n?y undilated pupil.
Fpn'0&~-fi A cause of vision loss was determined for each eye with
DrBkR`a? a presenting visual acuity worse than 6/18. In the absence of
nHXPEbq-g any other findings, uncorrected refractive error was considered
dW5r]D[Cx to be that cause if the acuity then improved to better
bqF?!t<B than 6/18 with pinhole. Other causes, including corneal
v1 ?
G opacity, cataract and diabetic retinopathy, required clinical
Ha ZV7 findings of sufficient magnitude to explain the level of vision
I-J%yutB loss. Although any eye may have more than one condition
{~g7&+9x* contributing to vision reduction, for the purposes of this
K!>3`[:I" study, a single cause of vision loss was determined for each
n@C#,v#^0 eye. The attributed cause was the condition most easily
7uv"# mq treated if each of the contributing conditions was individually
v{1g`E treatable to a vision of 6/18 or better. Thus, for example,
:m'(8s8 when uncorrected refractive error and lens opacity coexisted,
hD,^mru refractive error, with its easier and less expensive treatment,
drwxrZt was nominated as the cause. Where treatment of a condition
?"}U?m= present would not result in 6/18 or better acuity, it was
wt_ae|hv determined to be the cause rather than any coincident or
.OW5R* associated conditions amenable to treatment. Thus, for
3XbFg%8YG example, coincident retinal detachment and cataract would
#=m:>Q?%z be categorized as ‘posterior segment pathology’.
2Qp]r+! Participants who were functionally blind (less than 6/60
"4*QA0
As in the better eye) because of unoperated cataract were interrogated
1&=2" about the reasons for not having surgery. The
VWCC(YRU|$ responses were closed ended and respondents had the option
DuQ:82 3b of volunteering more than one barrier, all of which were
>Mm.MNU recorded in a piloted proforma. The first four reasons offered
qX[C% were considered for analysis of the barriers to cataract
e5ww~%, surgery.
0 R&7vn Those eyes previously operated for cataract were examined
"(+aWvb to characterize that surgery and the vision outcome. A
O=1#KNS detailed history of the surgery was taken. This included the
@$!"}xDR' age at surgery, place of surgery, cost and the use of spectacles
ydzvjp= afterward, including reasons for not wearing them if that was
" M&zW& the case.
:3}K
$ The Rapid Assessment of Cataract Surgical Services data
SQw"mO entry and analysis software package was used. The prevalences
h{E9rc1, of visually significant cataract, unoperated blinding
+k cataract and cataract surgery were determined. Where prevalence
]
RW*3X estimates were age and gender adjusted for the population
2l8z/o 7v of PNG, the estimated population structure for the
34vH+,!u 882 Garap
@d[)i,d:G et al.
KH[Oq
d © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
/Dk`? year 2000
p*Hf<)} 1
). HnK was used, and 95% CI were derived around these
Y3luU&' point estimates. Additional analysis for potential associations
)|S!k\^A of cataract, its surgery and surgical outcomes employed the
gHU0Pr9' STATA (version 8.0; StataCorp LP, TX, USA). Fisher’s exact
W4AFa>h test and the chi-square test for bivariate analysis and a multiple
5kj=Y]9\I logistic regression model for multivariate analysis were
$D#eD. used. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% CI were estimated. A
RYX=;n P
7(5 wP( -
DzvGR)>/ value of
bd.t|A <
eZRu{`AF* 0.05 was taken as significant for this analysis.
mINir- The Cataract Surgical Coverage (Eyes) (CSC(Eyes)) was
WAh{*$Rpl calculated. This is a surgical service impact indicator. It measures
"V7 &@3 the proportion of cataract that has been operated on
pd}af iF in a defined population at a particular point in time, being
sMqAuhw$. the eyes having had cataract surgery as a percentage of the
,O"zz7 combined total of all of those eyes operated with those
\Ot,&Z k2 currently blind (less than 6/60) from cataract (CSC(Eyes) at
c5tCw3$t 6/60
ucC'SS =
&r!*Y& 100
2UjQ!g` a
k:kx=K5=4 /(
5i1Xumh 4 a
n8>(m, +
djtCv;z b
!BW6l)=L ), where
'0>w_ge4 a
a-7T =
E
h>qUa pseudophakic
2_lb+@[W +
0SLS;s.GX aphakic eyes,
$&iw (BIq and
\>*B b
n$}Cj}eju =
q}mQm'
eyes with worse than 6/60 vision caused by cataract).
INj2B@_ 8
w{;esU The Cataract Surgical Coverage (Persons) (CSC(Persons))
yb:Xjg7
was determined. This considers people with operated
L<**J\=7M cataract (either or both eyes) as a proportion of those having
R3SAt-IE operable cataract. (CSC(Persons) at 6/60
^ LTKX`p =
Hqpw Q 100(
H
jm x
E/</ +
Oy^)lF/ y
$($26g )/
H_<X\( (
P=%'2BQ{{ x
A[@xTqs{{ +
q;p:)Q" y
b]Xc5Dp{ +
7]w]i5 z
D@5AI
]( ), in which
Qyr^\a;k' x
?,J'3nZ' =
A[F tPk{k persons with unilateral pseudophakia
!z7j.u`Y or unilateral aphakia and worse than 6/60 vision
+p:#$R)MW caused by cataract in the other eye,
4#o Lf1 y
qd=&*? =
fP>*EDn@xg persons with bilateral
DRC2U%[ previously operated cataract, and
tw/~z2G z
QN!$4 1A?{ =
f,'gQ5\ X3 persons with bilateral
XANPI| cataract causing vision worse than 6/60 in each).
u dhj$:t 8
Gf(|?"
H The Cataract Surgical Rate, being the number of cataract
M PhG:^g operations per year per million of population, was also
DdY89R 6 estimated.
biJ"@dm
4 R
=BN_Kvza^6 ESULTS
^gY^I`"e6 Of the 1191 people enumerated, 5 subjects were not available
2m]CmdV^ during the survey and 12 refused participation. Data
.Du-~N4\ from these 17 were not considered in the analysis. Of the
/0PBY-O remaining 1174 (98.6%), 606 (51.6%) were female, and 914
tnv @`xBn (77.9%) were domiciled in rural Rigo.
8<gYB$* S Cataract caused 35.2% of vision impairment (presenting
W+v7OSd92 vision less than 6/18) and 62.8% of functional blindness
noali96J (presenting vision less than 6/60) in the 2348 eyes sampled
z+RA (Table 1). It was second to refractive error (45.7%)
>
}& :y{z~ 7
'jr\F2 in the
~C|. .Z former, and the leading cause of the latter.
?C%mwW3pc For the 1174 subjects, cataract was the most prevalent
CK <Wba cause of vision impairment (46.7%) and functional blindness
P4&3jQ[
o (75.0%) (Table 1). On bivariate analysis, increasing age
O] T'\6w (
7+!4pf P
_$g2;X > <
E}7@?o7u} 0.001), illiteracy (
v}vwk8 P
MLbmz\8a <
us/}_r74N* 0.001) and unemployment
ljr?Z,R4 (
#@rvoi P
_6y#?8RMB <
DZ-2Z@{PX 0.001) were associated with cataract-induced functional
Rm^3K blindness. Gender was not significantly associated (
L5 -p0O`R P
c#-o@`Po =
XLu Y 0.6).
Z1 7=g@ In a multivariate model that included all variables found
7?U)V03 significant in bivariate analysis, increasing age (reference category
ZGa;' 50–59 years; OR: 2.6, 95% CI: 1.6, 5.9 for persons
*H2@lr
c aged 60–69, OR: 9.8, 95% CI: 4.6, 20.6 for persons aged
U=kPxe 70–79, and OR: 18.6, 95% CI: 8.3, 41.9 for persons aged
\
5&-U@ 80 years and older) and illiteracy (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.3, 3.8)
ZNHlq5 were associated with functional cataract blindness.
|\#~ The survey sample included 97 people (8.3%) who had
G\X}gqe(OJ previously undergone cataract surgery, for a total of 136 eyes
q(Q$lRj/I- (5.8%). On bivariate analysis, increasing age (
TJ_<21a P
tL>c@w#Pv =
(dH "b
* 0.02), male
y-.<iq gender (
m }J@w~# P
*F^t)K2 =
V_x8
Q+~? 0.02), literacy (
~x-"?K P
762c`aP_( <
;h7W(NO~z 0.001) and employed status
dv
W2X (
iaV%* P
z]49dCN =
X21k7 Ls 0.03) were associated with cataract surgery. Illiteracy
j*6>{_[ was significantly associated with reduced uptake of cataract
2]UwIxzR surgery (adjusted OR 0.43, 95% CI: 0.20, 0.91) in a multivariate
p0|PVn.^h model that adjusted for age, gender and employment
5qL;@Y status.
p=d,kY The CSC(Eyes) at 6/60 for the survey sample was
k9*6`w 34.5%, and the CSC(Persons) at the same vision level was
EK%J%NY 45.3%.
Gf->N
`N Most cataract surgery occurred in a government hospital
Ai*+LSG (
.gJv})Vi P
!^x;4@Ejm <
N?{.}-Q 0.001), more than 5 years ago (
c!ul9Cw P
\gW6E^ <
mb?r{WCi 0.001). Also, most
.5E6MF of the intracapsular extractions were performed more than
dsG:DS`q 5 years ago (
3-T"[tCe P
PN"=P2e/ 6 <
[!S%nYs&8L 0.001). Patients are now more likely to
}I"k=>Ycns receive intraocular lens surgery (
= tY%k!R P
*?x[pqGq <
Srom@c 0.001). Although most
nhLw&V3y surgery was provided free (
Yc-gJI*1 P
Blox~=cW =
u|sdQ 0.02), males, who were more
;8Ts likely to have surgery (
Rebo.6rG P
BMH?BRi =
Ol)M0u 0.02), were also more likely to
lbj_if; pay for it (
B42qiV2/k P
?/YT,W<c;& =
+wE>h>?; 0.03) (Table 2).
|HQFqa< As measured by presenting acuity, the vision outcomes of
[
-hsG E both intracapsular surgery and intraocular lens surgery were
;BW-ag \9 poor (Table 3). However, 62.6% of those people with at least
[W8?ww%qT Table 1.
0GcOI} Vision impairment and blindness by eye and person; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
K
j6@= Category 2348 eyes/1174 people surveyed
;*>':-4 Vision impairment Blindness
nzl3<Ar Eye (presenting
tREC)+*\ visual acuity less than 6/18)
f"d4HZD^ Person (presenting visual
Ta)6ly7' acuity less than 6/18 in the
o(Q='kK better eye)
ty
bM3VA Eye (presenting visual
{AO`[ acuity less than 6/60)
M6*8}\ Person (presenting visual
csms8J acuity less than 6/60 in the
~.<}/GP] _ better eye)
V6tUijz
Total Cataract Total Cataract Total Cataract Total Cataract
ufXU n
ziG]BZ %
Y[`%j\= n
m95;NT1N/g %
W=?s-*F[~ n
B{-+1f4 %
.6y(ox|LL n
#)28ESj %
4e9'yi n
mx")cGGQ %
a3(q;^v n
T
p
fC %
,?>:Cdz4 n
Tz 2<# pLR %
7s'r3}B` n
x2 m
A %
So\f[/em 50–59 years 266 27.9 49 14.6 84 22.8 23 13.4 74 18.0 37 14.3 17 14.2 10 11.1
SBqx_4} 60–69 years 298 31.3 93 27.8 121 32.9 50 29.1 119 29.0 67 26.0 31 25.8 18 20.0
09C[B+>h 70–79 years 252 26.5 119 35.5 106 28.8 57 33.1 133 32.4 94 36.4 42 35.0 34 37.8
f/K:~#k 80
WMXk-?v4 +
H:&|q+K=# years 136 14.3 74 22.1 57 15.5 42 24.4 85 20.6 60 23.3 30 25.0 28 31.1
~pj/
_@S@x Male 467 49.1 157 46.9 180 48.9 77 44.8 203 49.4 123 47.7 59 49.2 41 45.6
LG3:V'| Female 485 50.9 178 53.1 188 51.1 95 55.2 208 50.6 135 52.3 61 50.8 49 54.4
~R\Z&oQ All cases 952 100 335 35.2 368 100 172 46.7 411 100 258 62.8 120 100 90 75
iv]*HE Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 883
*Mr?}_,X* © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
y:N>t+'5 one eye operated on for cataract felt that their uncorrected
3-Xc3A=w vision, using either or both eyes, was sufficiently good that
nkvkHh spectacles were not required (Table 3).
d
%Z+.O ‘Lack of awareness of cataract and the possibility of surgery’
!O~5<tA[#1 was the most common (50.1%) reason offered by 90
+r
2\v cataract-induced functionally blind individuals for not seeking
_laLTP* and undergoing cataract surgery. Males were more likely
_N-JRM m< to believe that they could not afford the surgery (P = 0.02),
9e:}qO5) and females were more frequently afraid of undergoing a
C/L+:b&x~ cataract extraction (P = 0.03) (Table 4).
y $K#M DISCUSSION
R0!qweGi@ The limitations of the standardized rapid assessment methodology
<M4Qc12jP used for this study are discussed elsewhere.7 Caution
,wvzY7% should be exercised when extrapolating this survey’s
fm%1vM$[J Table 2. Circumstances of cataract surgery; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
Ltt+BUJc Category 136 cataract surgeries
ird
q51{G Male Female Aphakia
{} 11U0 (n = 74)
9-9:]2~g! Pseudophakia
3g#fX{e_5! (n = 60)
t,2Q~ied= Couched
j`9+pI (n = 2)
+'NiuN Male, n (%) 83 (61.0) 45 (60.8) 38 (63.3) 0 (0.0)
-
:0{
Female, n (%) 53 (39.0) 29 (39.2) 22 (36.7) 2 (100)
(HUGgX"= Undergone surgery in the last 5 years, n (%) 19 (22.9) 20 (37.7) 10 (13.5) 29 (48.3) 0 (0.0)
ir4uy Range of age at the time of surgery, years 39–84 40–87 39–87 45–85 52
e8TJ =}\ Age at the time of surgery, years, mean ± SD 61.3 ± 9.7 60.5 ± 11.6 60.8 ± 10.6 63.4 ± 10.9 52 ± 0.0
J6H3X;vxQw Surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 72 (86.7) 44 (83.0) 63 (85.1) 53 (88.3) 0 (0.0)
3ee?B~Tun Surgery in a private hospital, n (%) 10 (12.1) 7 (13.2) 10 (13.5) 7 (11.7) 0 (0.0)
:W/,V^x} Surgery in an eye camp, n (%) 1 (1.2) 0 (0.0) 1 (1.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
+P~E5
4 Surgery by traditionalist, n (%) 0 (0.0) 2 (3.8) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 2 (100)
Y( D@B|"'m Totally free surgery, n (%) 32 (38.6) 26 (49.1)
a?IL6$z Paid full price asked for surgery, n (%) 25 (30.1) 14 (26.4)
]byj[Gd Paid partial price asked for surgery, n (%) 26 (31.3) 13 (24.5)
'M*+HY\.0 Totally free surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 55 (47.4)
3f{%IU(z Full price surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 23 (19.8)
uxq!kF'Ls Partially paid surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 38 (32.8)
Z' 0Gd@/ Table 3. Characterization of cataract surgery outcomes; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
HHbkR2H1 (a) 136 cataract surgeries
] Qp0|45= (b) 97 people with at least one eye operated on for cataract
lrSo@JQ (c) 67 (69.1%) cataract operated people not currently using distance correction: 38 (56.7%) male; 29 (43.3%) female
^ftZ{uA Aphakia Pseudophakia Couched
/:
a~;i n % n % n %
7CGKm8T Total 74 54.4 60 44.1 2 1.5
'\:?FQ
C Presenting vision 6/18 or better 27 36.5 24 40 0 0.0
)>)_>[ Presenting vision worse than 6/60 40 54.1 11 18.3 2 100
)T6+} Aphakia Pseudophakia‡ Couched
8VLr*83~8 Unilateral† Bilateral n % n %
Pl=X<Bp n % n %
H~c+L'= Total 28 28.9 17 17.5 51 52.6 1 1.0
=>6Z"LD( Presenting vision 6/18 or better in better eye 15 53.6 11 64.7 35 68.6 0 0.0
q_8qowu" Presenting vision worse than 6/60 in better eye 13 46.4 3 17.6 9 17.6 1 100
Aa&3x~3+ Reason n %
V
#W(c_g Never provided 20 29.9
AZ5c^c) Damaged 2 3.0
ZYBNS~Q Lost 3 4.5
Rww"Z=F Do not need 42 62.6
P%smX`v †Unilateral aphakes with an unoperated contralateral eye. ‡Bilateral pseudophakes (n = 9) + those with one eye aphakic and the other
Nuk\8C pseudophakic (n = 12) + unilateral pseudophakes with an unoperated contralateral eye (n = 30).
|pr~Ohz 884 Garap et al.
^HKxaW9W © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
U %Aj~K^b results to the entire population of PNG. However, this
6^['g-\2 study’s results are the most systematically collected and
7,|-%!p[ objective currently available for eye care service planning.
MQ"<r,o?: Based on this survey sample, the age-gender-adjusted
}6eWdm!B prevalence of vision impairment from all causes for those
`c{
i+ 50 years and older in PNG is 29.2% (95% CI: 27.6, 35.1,
2:i`, deff = 2.3), with 13.1% (95% CI: 11.3, 15.1, deff = 1.2) due
BZsw(l4/0' to uncorrected refractive error.7 Cataract (7.4% [95% CI:
ms3Ec`i9 6.4, 10.2, deff = 1.3]) is the second most frequent cause. The
z]\0]i
adjusted prevalence for functional blindness from all causes
yA(H=L-=!1 in people aged 50 years and older is 8.9% (95% CI: 8.4, 12.0,
g}' "&Y deff = 1.2),7 with cataract the leading cause at 6.4% (95%
pz?.(AmU\ CI: 5.1, 7.3, deff = 1.1). This is typical of developing countries.
k$o6~u 2& However, atypically, it would seem that cataract blindness
V
)1SZt@x in PNG is not associated with female gender.9
wamqeb{u Assuming that ‘negligible’6 cataract blindness (less than
j/wNPB/NM 5% at visual acuity less than 3/60,8 although it may be as
BWL~)Hx much as 10–15% at less than 6/6010) occurs in the under
" S#0QH%5 50 years age group, then, based on a 2005 population estimate
:?jOts>uP of 5.545 million, PNG would be expected to currently
RhbYDsG have 32 000 (25 000–36 000) cataract-blind people. An
_V6;`{$WK additional 5000 people in the 50 years and older age group
CbS9fc& will have cataract-reduced vision (6/60 and better, but less
5`6@CRef than 6/18), along with an unknown number under the age of
|;{wy 50 years.
rq}ew0&/
The age-gender-adjusted prevalence of those 50 years
<J {VTk ~ and older in PNG having had cataract surgery is 8.3% (95%
,+,""t CI: 6.6, 9.8, deff = 1.3). Prevalences for males and females,
InNuK0@ respectively, are 10.2% (95% CI: 7.7, 12.7) and 6.4% (95%
'!{zO"
1* CI: 4.5, 8.4), with the expected9 association with male gender
+Medu?K
` (age adjusted OR 1.6, 95% CI: 1.2, 2.1). Assuming negligible
x1$fkNu cataract surgery is performed on those under age
N$>g)Ml? 50 years (noting mean age and age range of surgery in
}#
'O b Table 2), there would be about 41 400 people in PNG today
|CY.Y, who have had this surgery. In the survey sample, 28.7% of
lkFv5^% surgery occurred in the last 5 years (Table 2). Assuming that
vy1:>N?#5 there have been no deaths, annual surgical numbers have
?J6J#{LRd been steady during this time, and a population mean of the
7DKbuUK 2000 and 2005 estimates, this would equate to about 2400
cm6cW(x6 people per year, being a Cataract Surgical Rate (CSR) of
Y%|f<C)lx2 approximately 440 per million per year.
gG~UsA Unfortunately, no operation numbers are available from
I
r<5
% the private Port Moresby facility, which contributed 12.5%
B Lw ssr. (Table 2) of the surgeries in this study. However, from
P8).Qn records and estimates, outreach, government and mission
<i%.bfQ/- hospital surgical services perform approximately 1600 cataract
:JxShF:M surgeries per year. Excluding the private hospital, this
DZilK: equates to a CSR of about 300 per million population per
k^S=i_ U year.
EUu"H` E+ Whatever the exact CSR, certainly less than the WHO
V[5-A $ft estimate of 716,11 the order of magnitude is typical of a
U<KvKg country with PNG’s medical infrastructure, resourcing and
loLQ@?E bureacratic capability.11 With the exception of the Christian
r|{h7' Blind Mission surgeon, who performs in excess of 1000 cases
i~M CY.F per year, PNG’s ophthalmologists operate, on average, on
B'lWs; fewer than 100 cataracts each per year. This is also typical.6
@F+4
NL-'P It will be evident that the current surgical capability in
m5v9:
5{ PNG is insufficient to address the cataract backlog. The
:0Rd )*k,v CSC(Persons) of 45.3%, relating directly to the prevalence
_b&Mrd of bilateral cataract blindness, and CSC(Eyes) of 34.5%,
*[wy-
fu relating to the total surgical workload, are in keeping with
z+@aQ@75 other developing countries.6,8,10 If an annual cataract blindness
3qXOsa7 incidence of 20% of prevalence12 is accepted, and surgery
`kpX}cKK} is only performed on one eye of each person, then 6400
(Ub=sC (5000–7200) surgeries need to be performed annually to meet
SsIy ;l this. While just addressing the incidence, in time the backlog
{Uz@`QO3 will reduce to near zero. This would require a three- or
!\'7j-6 fourfold increase in CSR, to about 1200. Despite planning
GLp2
?fon for this and the best of intentions, given current circumstances
d(3F:dbk in PNG, this seems unlikely to occur in the near future.
8V`NQS$ Increasing the output of surgical services of itself will be
h3Nwxj~E insufficient to reduce cataract-related blindness. As measured
' Ph by presenting acuity, the outcome of cataract surgery is poor
9z$]hl (Table 3). Neither the historical intracapsular or current
D>+&= 5{ intraocular lens surgical techniques approach WHO outcome
,24NMv7 guidelines of more than 80% with 6/18 and better
X6kB
R presenting vision, and less than 5% presenting functionally
M#LQz~E blind.13 Better outcomes are required to ensure scarce
7!+kyA\}r^ Table 4. Reasons that cataract-blind (worse than 6/60) people do not seek or undergo cataract surgery; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea
7-6Z\.- (2005)
u/Fa+S 90 people functionally blind due to cataract
\(Dq=UzQI Responses by 41
$#2ik~]> males (45.6%)
J~eY,n.6] Responses by 49
v_)a=I%o&2 females (54.4%)
kT@RA} Responses by all
Rp
`JF}~o n % n % n %
>y m MQEX` Lack of awareness of cataract and the possibility of surgery 18 43.9 28 57.1 46 50.1
,Xs%Cg_Ig Too old to do anything about vision 7 17.1 6 12.2 13 14.4
MH[Zw$ Believes unable to afford surgery 10 24.4 7 14.3 17 18.9
_P
0,UgZz No time available to attend surgery 4 9.8 6 12.2 10 11.1
Genk YtS Waiting for cataract to mature 4 9.8 5 10.2 9 10.0
cTu7U=% None available to accompany person to surgery 4 9.8 2 4.1 6 6.7
>8_#L2@ Fear of the surgery 2 4.9 6 12.2 8 8.9
W7>4-gk Believes no services available 2 4.9 2 4.1 4 4.4
G;_QE<V~_ Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 885
jY
EB`& © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
OSk:njyC[ resources are well used.14 Routine monitoring of surgical
Ev* b activity and outcome, perhaps more likely to occur if done
J\<7M8
manually, may contribute to an improvement.15,16 So too
[/hS5TG|7 would better patient selection, as many currently choose not
,cPNZ-% to wear postoperation correction because they see well
*(YtO enough with the fellow eye (Table 3). Improving access to
p.^mOkpt refraction and spectacles will also likely improve presenting
pA%XqG*=Y acuities (Table 3).
OLUQjvnU Of those cataract blind in the survey, 50.1% claimed to
Z.Lm[$/edn be unaware of cataract and the possibility of surgery
vA@Kb3, (Table 4). However, even when arrangements, including
^0"NcOzzxl transportation, were made for study participants with visually
Kdh(vNB> significant cataract to have surgery in Port Moresby, not
)QE7
$|s all availed themselves of this opportunity. The reasons for
wLC!vX.S this need further investigation.
TU$PAwn= Despite the apparent ignorance of cataract among the
: Q X~bq population, there would seem little point in raising demand
fiOc;d8 and expectations through health promotion techniques until
1MHP#X;| such time as the capacity of services and outcomes of surgery
dl;~-'0 have been improved. Increasing the quantity and quality of
]'V8{l cataract surgery need to be priorities for PNG eye care
F>jPr8& services. The independent Christian Blind Mission Goroka
E*ybf' and outreach services, using one surgeon and a wellresourced
GY<ErS)2 support team, are examples of what is possible,
JL $6Fw; both in output and in outcome. However, the real challenge
ozH7c_ < is to be able to provide cataract surgery as an integrated part
$V-]DD%Y of a functioning service offering equitable access to good eye
/Y5I0Ko Uw health and vision outcomes, from within a public health
H
.)}| system that needs major attention. To that end, registrar
JPfNf3<@My training and referral hospital facilities and practice are being
WsRG>w3" improved.
-q' n p0H It may be that the required cataract service improvements
I2kqA5>)j are beyond PNG’s under-resourced and managed public
6cz%>@ health system. The survey reported here provides a baseline
#Z<pks2
y against which progress may be measured.
,6Sa ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
B%gk[!d}8 The authors thankfully acknowledge the technical support
j[NA3Vj1P provided by Renee du Toit and Jacqui Ramke (The International
uXq?Z@af|f Centre for Eyecare Education), Doe Kwarara (FHFPNG
/*p4(D_A Eye Care Program) and David Pahau (Eye Clinic, Port
-v?,{
?$0 Moresby General Hospital). Thanks also to the St Johns
u /!U/| Ambulance Services (Port Moresby) volunteers and staff for
HX\@Qws their invaluable contribution to the fieldwork. This survey
xn)FE4 was funded in part by a program grant from New Zealand
y?O{J!U Agency for International Development (NZAID) to The
*V#v6r7<Y/ Fred Hollows Foundation (New Zealand).
g`)3m,\ REFERENCES
vE/g{~[5 1. National Statistical Office, Government of the Independent
[W=%L:Ea State of PNG. Papua New Guinea 2000 Census. Port Moresby:
h95C4jBE PNG Government, 2000.
Gp9>R~$ 2. Parsons G. Ophthalmic practice in Papua New Guinea. PNG
C.L5\"% Med J 1975; 18: 79–82.
^k &zX!W 3. Parsons G. A decade of ophthalmic statistics in Papua New
:Q
2\3 Guinea. PNG Med J 1991; 34: 255–61.
W~p^AHco` 4. Dethlefs R. The trachoma status and blindness rates of selected
1~8F
& areas of Papua New Guinea in 1979–80. Aust J Ophthalmol 1982;
6;Cr92
10: 13–18.
"F>-W\% 5. WHO. Rapid assessment of cataract surgical services. In: Vision
AKx\U?ei7 2020: The Right to Sight: Developing an Action Plan Version 2 CDROM.
v}A] R9TY World Health Organization and International Agency
yd"|HHx for the Prevention of Blindness, 2004. Available from: http://
U@yrqT@;AU www.who.int/ncd/vision2020_actionplan/documents/raccs/ I'"*#QOX installation_racss.htm
p`gg 6. Amansakhatov S, Volokhovskaya ZP, Afanasyeva AN, Limburg
hDmtBdE H. Cataract blindness in Turkmenistan: results of a national
B;4hI? survey. Br J Ophthalmol 2002; 86: 1207–10.
%#Wg>6 7. Garap JN, Sheeladevi S, Shamanna BR et al. Blindness and
:d/Z&LXD vision impairment in the elderly of Papua New Guinea. Clin
GW'=/
z7 Experiment Ophthalmol 2006; 34: 335–41.
V5KAiG<d 8. Limburg H, Foster A. Cataract surgical coverage: an indicator
U"-mLv"| to measure the impact of cataract intervention programmes.
C JiMg'K Community Eye Health J 1998; 11: 3–6.
!IoD";Oi 9. Lewallen S, Courtright P. Gender and use of cataract surgical
l*_b)&CH services in developing countries. Bull World Health Organ 2002;
OW)8Z60 80: 300–3.
!f)'+_d 10. Bassett KL, Noertjojo K, Liu L et al. Cataract surgical coverage
GY,@jp|R and outcome in the Tibet Autonomous Region of China. Br J
$>/J8iB Ophthalmol 2005; 89: 5–9.
fouy?? 11. WHO. State of the World’s Sight: Vision 2020: The Right to Sight:
-iBu:WyY$ 1999–2005. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2005.
1}S_CR4XBs 12. WHO. How to plan cataract intervention in a district. In: Vision
1>a^Q 2020: The Right to Sight: Developing an Action Plan Version 2 CDROM.
Ze WHSU
World Health Organization and International Agency
;oh88,*' for the Prevention of Blindness, 2004. Available from: http://
"4g1I< www.who.int/ncd/vision2020_actionplan/contents/4.1.htm
=6 13. WHO. Informal Consultation on Analysis of Blindness Prevention Outcomes.
.%-> WHO/PBL/98.68. Geneva: World Health Organization,
Uj k``; 1998.
)yJe h 14. Brian G, Ramke J, Szetu J et al. Towards standards of outcome
e-qr
d quality: a protocol for the surgical treatment of cataract in
7azxqa5: developing countries. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2006; 34: 383–
[n74&EH 7.
BD4.sd+H, 15. Yorston D, Gichuhi S, Wood M et al. Does prospective monitoring
MM'<uy improve cataract surgery outcomes in Africa? Br J Ophthalmol
*tRJ= 2002; 86: 543–7.
W:rzfO.`Z 16. Limburg H. Monitoring cataract surgical outcomes: methods
ACyQsmqm: and tools. Community Eye Health J 2002; 15: 51–3.