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: 2009-06-04   

Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia

ABSTRACT =BW>jD  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes Bgs3sM9  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to AK%2#}k.  
unoperated cataract in Australia. Kj;gxYD>6  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual Ht#5;c2/  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than v~i/e+.h>y  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination M;*f(JY$  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography v#i,pBj  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who Ym IVtQ  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater NFpR jC?  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or ]&%_Fpx  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. 1B+uv0lA  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne 3n-~+2l  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 >-fOkOWXy  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria Oi# F  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract mEsOYIu{  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had m~a'  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 9 A0wiKp  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber ?u`+?" 'H  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber ab4(?-'-  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated J WaI[n}  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or ,YzrqVY  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven  )! 2$yD  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate b z3 &  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery Bu4J8eLx  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% y7J2: /@[x  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone d%tF~|#A%  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an 9Qja|;  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision R zG7Xr=t  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no #4uuT?!  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural f4F13n_0X  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance O/EI8Qvm  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated ?"oW1a\  
cataract. Y`$dtg {  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is H(}Jt!/:  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced ~zdHJ8tYp  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of b5r.N1ms  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes {Dv^j#  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. p6=L}L  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health uCX+Lw+As  
services accessibility, prevalence pv/LTv  
INTRODUCTION 46U?aHKW@|  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in ){yw k  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all <zmtVE*>g  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate ]xJ5}/  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be 6]`XW 0{C  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 .m',*s<CMQ  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting ,:RHhg  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is H)#HK!F6f  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in A\{dq:  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists 2L=+z1%I  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather TRB)cJZ?  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral p8yn? ~]^  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has :`FL95  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for &hciv\YT2W  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has N*d )<8_  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 }B-@lbK6)  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is \\<waU''  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the eh`sfH  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract +kh#Jq.  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence z:Sr@!DZ  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors #w2;n@7;X  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to qU ESN!  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. ["5Z =4  
METHODS e1*<9&S  
Study population SZGeF;N  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual os=Pr{  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 ]QB<N|ps  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to j%|#8oV  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. ]{tnNr>mv  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of 94 2(a  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen + - [M 7J  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites zn5U(>=c  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. jzRfD3_s  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 /h/f &3'h  
Original Article UODbT&&  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia } Mh@%2$  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD %/b3G*$W  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia (e:@7W)L  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, x1g0_&F  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au <W,M?r+  
78 McCarty et al. B@v\tpR  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural ^jY'Hj.Bs  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural \v7->Sy8  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify 6 WD(  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a 4$j7DJ8dj  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of @O&<_&  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, m :6.  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of Ec44JD  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. br@GnjG  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local XI4le=^EM  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. F\!Va  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian L7~9u|7a#  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. -?m"+mUP  
Assessment of cataract \!+sL JP  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after *.4VO+^  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine MLu@|Xgh  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the $#b@b[h<w  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using =) Aav!  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and b7t hu5  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on l ~b  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) S< TUZ /;  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, B)q 5m y  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, 5:oteNc3  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than ;x]CaG)f  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to B)5 QI  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual il=:T\'U9  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, 2 Nr *  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. Hp#IOsP~  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to O]| T !  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the M, uQ8SZA[  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight EF Z]|Z7  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the ^ UB*Q  
analyses. t08E 2sI  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., JB}jt)ol%  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in ?}mbp4+j [  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. a 8(mU%  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman I(bxCiRV  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph AW\#)Em  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were r+yl{  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera 9fj8r3 F#  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 l-~ o&n  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately r_p4pxs  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated eHIsTL@Fp  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies `~+1i5-}  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were aR c2#:~;  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, V\2&?#GZ  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph GIs *;ps7w  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical *# 7 1aZ  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) ah8xiABa  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to #P^cR_|\  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. _d J"2rx  
Assessment of risk factors ZD` 9Ez)5  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information @D3|Ak1  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 k X1#+X  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration ]K^#'[  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, xDtJ& 6uFw  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension EPn0ZwnS:M  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and :'+- %xUM  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were @/yQ4Gr  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to J Gpy$T{t  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants IMF9eS{L  
and use of vitamin supplements. Bq# l8u  
Data management and statistical analysis j_#oP  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a 4Ww.CkRG  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, 6.0/asN}  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or kH9fK80  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at y wf@G; fK  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms 6+Bccqn|  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and Rv^ \o  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency rT}k[  
checks were performed on the entire data set. t (sQw '>  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was ] 1:pnd  
employed for statistical analyses. x]X!nx 6G  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific N:]Ud(VRM  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to 6t0-u ~  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five ]|#%`p56  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates <lxE^M  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific ^@a|s Sb  
data were weighted according to the 1996 __Tg1A  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the _w\A=6=q|  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. 54geU?p0  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared =yy7P[D  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated ]!=,8dY  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted +_E\Omcw  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the #y4+O;{  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. yo=0Ov  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically  %=t8   
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use p\&Lbu zv  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The ='"hB~[  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment N)tqjq  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with OU /=wpt  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence tXWh q  
limits. 2 &+Nr+P  
RESULTS |@Mx? (  
Study population `ywI+^b  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 I\FBf&~  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) Munal=wL  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did d2!A32m  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was 6k@(7Mw8A  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as ; wpX  
a whole. E/6@>.T?'  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to HT: p'Yyi  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The 1m5 =Nu  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to QwaAGUA  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural %JsCw8C6?  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) F}C.F  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. EG|fGkv"  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery >cE@m=[  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases 8>KBh)q  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any ZI0C%c.~  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). |~y>R#u8pm  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three CI~P3"`]  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence 0<{zW%w  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes ;<9dND  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% ~$PQ8[=  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract V:wx@9m)  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract dg?[gD8!4&  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall wy1xZQ<5  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was 3ZF-n`  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). r@XH=[:  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract )U~,q>H+ %  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified 7a4b,-93  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated sUki|lP  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents h dw~AGO#  
as information about risk factor exposure was not F_?aoP&5  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed k!^Au8Up?  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence ')8 c  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic me7?   
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a ,Qd;t  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use Wd R~  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private FBR]) h'Z  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, mo$`a6[h<  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. ~; emUU  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the z&3in  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having bm &$wf  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract :dZq!1~t  
surgery were not available. # -0}r  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate aMxg6\8  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had ~ .FZF  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been d^0vaX6e}  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment (.:!_OB0N  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant :$>Co\D  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression aQMUC6cPM@  
model. The factors that remained significantly related @Qlh  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever /!V) 2j,  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been ': }  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors :r{;'[38  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate sS 5aJ}Qs  
model. z NF.nS}:  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract r+4<Lon~  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with vZDM}u  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 rF/k$_ bFt  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort p~n62(  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total -HE@wda  
(years) (%) (%) (%) (?G?9M#7_  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) e^N6h3WF  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) aBBTcN%'  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) yX-h|Cr"  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) 7a,/DI2o  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) 7$z]oVbO'  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) ([mC!d@a  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) _P^ xX'v  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) $KmhG1*s  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) cZ<@1I5QK  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) .L#xX1qr  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) L.cGt"{  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) k*?Axk#  
Age-standardized U2lDTRt  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) ZwC\n(_y  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 w9Eb\ An  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% 9XH}/FcP_O  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, 'Q^P#<<  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). l6[0i  
Outcomes of cataract surgery |uT &M`7\{  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior &!adW@y  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were gz,x6mnQ  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular ]0 g$ 3  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular C6!P8qX  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact H.n +CR  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of {<p-/|Z52  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected r8k.I4  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% Ot^<:\< `G  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes ]tu:V,q  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, {m<NPtp910  
P = 0.027). [pc6!qhDG&  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity ;&A%"8o  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without P ]prrKZe,  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract KBb{Z;%  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, ]Uy cT3A  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the SviGLv;oR  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 `akbzHOM  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this Zl:Z31  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four r N.<S[  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these opQ d ym  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction bSKe@4C  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one |.qK69  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract v4YY6? 4  
surgery. 4;_<CB  
DISCUSSION 2f=7`1RCD  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically s-z*Lq*  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract (16U]s  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes DH5]Kzb/  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual Za&.sg3RG  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and 3XOf-v:~  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is TsX(=N_  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, p{sbf;-x}  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract N?7vcN+-t)  
services throughout Australia. +mr\AAFn  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age Sv E|"  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is ~MgU"P>  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous )/:r $n7  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye Ky qFeR  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract j.5;0b_L^  
between studies because of different methodologies and :=0XT`iY  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well U;QN+fF]u  
as the different age structures of the study populations. XyS|7#o  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of jMT];%$[  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. iTt#%Fs)4M  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity a zUEp8`|  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. 49BLJ|:P?  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the ^aW?0qsH  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. 7= o2$  
80 McCarty et al. Xgy)Z:R  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort Cw=wU/)  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total $S"QyAH~-a  
(years) (%) (%) (%) h%hE$2  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) 4-?'gN_  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( xTnd9'Pk`:  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) Ozygr?*X  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) yxECK&&P0#  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) `q ;79t  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) _t:l:x.;T  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) O\5*p=v  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) I92c!`{  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) !eoN  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) LE15y>  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) !n=@(bT*wT  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) A%VBBvk  
Age-standardized q4k )E  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) 2u[:3K-@,  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract ;w(]z  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. [;c'o5M&  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 |~! R5|Q  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the Dm@wTt8N(  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude s$I l;  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the /H)K_H#|;  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). LE_1H >  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains ILUA'T=B0  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban q8:Z.<%8  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than B| IQ/g?  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, O&# bC  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in $'f<4  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, &bx;GG\<4  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens *G^n<p$"  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. hFw\uETu  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable s,TKC67.%+  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, oZ1#.o{  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that z_#B 4  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and NyD[9R?  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is 9 i)E<.6  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted -OpI,qyS  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement tb7Wr1$<  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We P>=~\v nN#  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction Y[gj2vNe4g  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have 7?K?-Oj  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this d"+zDc;  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their l=5(5 \  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants  C~vU  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the %3'4Qmp R  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ cA"',N8!5  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their h0NM5   
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to t=iSMe  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change =+q9R`!L]  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function GZ\;M6{oh  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in [7?K9r\#  
overall quality of life.22 e#K =SV!H  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually _`WbR&d2Id  
significant posterior capsule opacification following Q44Pg$jp  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% U9IP`)z_5t  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated @L^2VVWk^  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear < pI2}  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an Y((s<]7  
opaque capsule. E;~gQ6vAI  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and I!.o & dk  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, 7/NXb  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We S pDV D  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more Z{`;Ys:zk  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is ^8aj\xe(  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 s M({u/  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any  L5 ""  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of 6 k+F TDL  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care CfQOG7e@  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without ?hvPPEJf  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the dlN(_6>b  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated (E59)z -  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. VYkOJAEBg  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem vmL% %7  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract !7@IWz(, "  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will ed4:r/Dpo  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the %5RY Ea  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in :L&Bbw(  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well V0z.w:-  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes pj&vnX6O^  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. 6#fl1GdH-  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract ln)_Jf1r  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for {&8 -OoH ~  
cataract extractions increases. bgGd  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS wxVf6`  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants V"(S<o  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the s/UIo ^m  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell g !w7Yv  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and r^-3( 77n  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient 0e9W>J9  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal ~"!F&  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. S{{D G  
REFERENCES BbUZ,X*Y  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. o0&jel1a  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. Pc C9)x  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, N,V %/O{Y  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population D`0II=  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. E.Xf b"]  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens *5]fjh{  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated :M9'wg  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. /ZHuT=j1  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related ."l@aE=|  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. sh[Yu  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. iq-n(Rfw~  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye &10vdAnBRC  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population v' .:?9  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: Xg?hh 0s  
363–71. qY`)W[  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. 5_ -YF~  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye U(]a(k<r  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. C%t~?jEK~^  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. )+RTA y[k  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient [ \ LA  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. p#hs8xz  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. gN1b?_g  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated F2]v]]F!  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. :&}(?=<R}L  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. ~Wjm"|c  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too U(3+*'8r,1  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal uFOxb}a9v  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: 0?  (  
77–80. sufidi  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice $D +6=m[  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? eyf\j,xP&  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. 0'*whhH  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest dqO!p6  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye "- S2${  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic } NW^?37  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. r,X5@/  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading U1bhd}MoR  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. uN20sD}  
82 McCarty et al. 8rwkux >  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & sE@t$'=  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. j@1cllJkh  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume  {I+   
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International 5 !u.w  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. ;cd{+0  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and 8"/ 5Lh(  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. R+k-mbvnt  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison yPrp:%PS  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased ?;@xAj  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Z_Jprp{3h  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. im{'PgiR  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the uqwB`<>KJ  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health |P7c {  
Organization, 1997. w='1uV<6  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, S6CM/  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation | n5F_RL  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. d2lOx|jt  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. b:3n)-V{u  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of Gc2sY 0  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative {|?OKCG{  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. a$ a+3}\  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. Li~(kw3  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated  ^ZnlWZ@r  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. z3+y|nx!  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. Nf8."EDUW  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract =!7k/n';  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and !9=hUpRN  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. Qj: D=j8  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. h- .V[]<  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to ?95^&4Oh0  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. >m=' #x0>Y  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. K=Z~$)Og)  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A {a`t1oX(  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule *(6vO{  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. A6ipA /_  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. h(]aP<49L  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health nEu,1  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. *0zdI<Oe  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in $;NxO0$  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, B:S/ ?v  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract y1R53u`;L  
Surgery Outcomes Study. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1998; 82: 1107–11.
评价一下你浏览此帖子的感受

精彩

感动

搞笑

开心

愤怒

无聊

灌水

  
描述
快速回复

验证问题:
免费考博网网址是什么? 正确答案:freekaobo.com
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交