加入VIP 上传考博资料 您的流量 增加流量 考博报班 每日签到
   
主题 : Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia
级别: 禁止发言
显示用户信息 
楼主  发表于: 2009-06-05   

Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia

ABSTRACT w=Ai?u  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes KmS$CFsGL  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to {9?++G"\  
unoperated cataract in Australia. `#@#e Z  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual k{\wjaf)  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than NZT2ni4  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination j11FEE<W  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography vd<r}3i*  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who )(bAi  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater h0**[LDH  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or Ac^hZ.qPz  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. pHKcKqB*13  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne c{.y9P6  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 ?e=3G4N  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria 10tlD<eYb  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract $ljzw@k  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had <S[]VXy  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 h]6m+oPW  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber #*;G8yV  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber .+3~ w  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated 813t=A  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or Gx)U~L$B  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven |)KOy~"  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate y@XE! L  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery ]g] ]\hS  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% . E8Gj'yO  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone shk yN  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an >DM^/EAG{  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision .@KI,_X6,  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no .n\j<Kq  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural P>}OwW  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance %ztv.K(8  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated ;9MIapfUd(  
cataract. Vq&}i~  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is `; +UWdAR  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced sq rY<@%  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of QnJd}(yN  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes Q30TR  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. <D`VFSEJ  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health .;J6)h  
services accessibility, prevalence 0<[g7BbR  
INTRODUCTION 4k_y;$4WN  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in cj;k{ Moc  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all STjk<DP(  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate dKpUw9C#/  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be +\x}1bNS%j  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 _aP 2gH  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting IY,n7x0d  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is GHR r+  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in QTIC5cl,  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists "1wjh=@z  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather g/+|gHq^  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral -|2k$W  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has Pi5($cn  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for *@eZt*_  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has \AOHZ r  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 cqG&n0 zb  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is HSj=g}r  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the @/8O@^  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract p~yGp] yJ9  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence 24I\smO  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors "IJ 9vXI  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to av"dJm  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. =X3Rk)2r  
METHODS F;8 Uvj  
Study population &PUn,9 Rm  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual l.uW>AoLh  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 .cK<jF@'  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to B8 r#o=q1  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. `zOn(6B;U  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of h\/T b8  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen oAF#bj_f  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites {JtfEna  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. )@_5}8  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 r*g<A2g%  
Original Article MI,kKi  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia e=Q{CsP  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD }K|40oO5  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Q tl! f  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, y eWB.M~X  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au "H|hN  
78 McCarty et al. H|z:j35\  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural 5OC{_-  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural ^oDSU7j5,  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify CD pLV:  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a &5 n0 J  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of M,g$  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, S?u@3PyJm  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of mI,!8#  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. Ja{[T  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local "f4atuuXa  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. 'Omj-o'tn9  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian aK]H(F2#  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. `J-&Y2_/k  
Assessment of cataract c52S2f7  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after h[oI/X  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine jbTsrj"g  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the f vr|<3ojo  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using Qn`Fq,uvL  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and t&H3yV  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on p~17cH4~-f  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) >=d%t6 %(  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, ,o s M|!,  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, C]NL9Gq`  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than =v7%IRP5  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to o|nN0z)b4  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual DGO\&^GT^  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, O^sOv!!RH/  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. |6!L\/}M%  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to ~JG\b?s  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the >rid3~  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight .a7!*I#g  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the l G $s(  
analyses.  _!E)a  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., ^e( *{K;8  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in D\k'Eez  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. 48RSuH  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman ws< (LH  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph k.!m-5E  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were WFG`-8_e[I  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera F-PQ`@ZNW  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 Z Z9D6+R  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately L'r gCOJ<  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated GDY=^r  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies s_%KWkS  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were \JbOT%1  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, k%%0"+y#a  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph z~Is E8  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical $ $e"[g  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) f]48>LRE8  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to Ft 6{g JBG  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. _:~I(c6   
Assessment of risk factors ]i Yp  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information L&hv:+3N  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 Eal*){"<,?  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration W[t0hbV w  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, l$ufW|  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension 5F$~ZDu  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and ^=[b] *V  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were ;S+]Z!5LT  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to ff5 e]^,  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants SGP)A(,k9  
and use of vitamin supplements. Q/`W[Et  
Data management and statistical analysis |vtj0 ,[  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a [Zne19/  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, f"R'Q|7D  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or ^NXxMC( e+  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at 'a G`qPB  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms 7mA:~-.u  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and dy3fZ(=q^  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency 8 `}I]  
checks were performed on the entire data set. <+_WMSf;4  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was ?H!QV;ku  
employed for statistical analyses. YnlZyw!  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific GTke<R  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to a/xnf<(H  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five 9k;%R5(  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates /" @cv{  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific 5xhYOwQBo  
data were weighted according to the 1996 &]O^d4/  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the sp6A* mwl  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. LAY~hF"  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared h-6x! 6pm  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated (BGflb  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted UB w*}p  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the (} wMU]!_  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. -nqq;|%  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically K"8!  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use UN|S!&C$  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The \m#{ {SGm  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment IQQ>0^Q~  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with )i<Qg.@MX  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence Pr3>}4M  
limits. p8MN>pLP%  
RESULTS #9t3<H[  
Study population T@d4NF#  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 {bNVNG^  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) C?g<P0h  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did EZ[e  a<  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was "Ug+# ;}p$  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as J7wIA3.O  
a whole.  CP Ju=  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to B#4'3Y-3  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The /%TL{k&m$  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to ]{18-=  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural uP.dCs9-  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) Wa9yyc  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. xn anca  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery 6Oy6r  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases {/i&o  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any T>w;M?`9K  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). *mn"G K6  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three ^M+aQg%  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence ]>[ 0DX]j  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes XQZiJ %'  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% KxDfPd+j[  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract |k]fY*z(  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract 4jC7>mE  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall s3=sl WY=  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was Z61 L;E  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). 'q l<R0g  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract oG c9 6B%  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified Nt687  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated dw%g9DT  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents ;WG%)^e  
as information about risk factor exposure was not (V0KmNCW`  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed !{vZvy"  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence v.c.5@%%o  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic J7@Q;gcl:  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a %2'Y@AX`  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use YMj iJTl  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private *!yA'z<  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, |Rz}bsrZ  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. Z<'iT%6+r  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the jWso'K  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having ps*iE=D  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract B. ~[m}  
surgery were not available. ?(M]'ia{  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate ~J >Jd  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had \/9O5`u*V  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been t-SZBNb  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment C|]Zpn#{K  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant  ~;uU{TT  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression z6f Y_LL  
model. The factors that remained significantly related XII' ,&  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever )"%J~:`h}  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been "ZuA._  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors Wr+1e1[  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate RY\ 0dv>  
model. ek d[|g  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract W>u{JgY  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with dwb^z+   
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 w8F`RRHEE  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort XE#$|Z  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total [S0wwWU |0  
(years) (%) (%) (%) iKv"200h(  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) gCbS$Pw  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) vZPBjloT!.  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) W)L*zVj~  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) hb1eEn  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) g O/\Yi  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) biRkq c;  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) kpMo7n  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) {D8yqO A}  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) #Fkp6`Q$x  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) !Oi':OQG  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) whFJ]  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) xRZ/[1f!  
Age-standardized %8>0;ktU  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) BW ux!  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 gOMy8w4>  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% EtQ:x$S_  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, cI-@ nV  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). Q'YakEv >=  
Outcomes of cataract surgery vi` VK&+r  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior AB<%GzW0(  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were Az/B/BLB  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular w8zr0z  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular *d31fBCk%  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact Uy@:-NC)kn  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of UK)wV  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected t_+owiF)M  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% &AVX03P  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes Iu^I?c[  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, h<qi[d4X  
P = 0.027). +}eK8>2  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity *;Z a))  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without O\h%ZLjfO  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract M|R\[ Zf  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, -fN5-AC  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the 8Nx fYA  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 >)k[085t  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this yoz-BS  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four T "#DhEM  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these '@5 x=>  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction W{1l?Wo  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one [}4\CWM  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract % .8(R &  
surgery. _qH]OSo   
DISCUSSION uWi pjxS  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically M0hR]4T  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract fw|t`mUGu  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes N:EljzvP}  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual `%~f5<  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and b, 47 EJ}  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is Equ%6x  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, hMgk+4*  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract SQN{/")T  
services throughout Australia. 5f75r  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age #v4^,$k>  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is T0cm+|S  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous !:~C/B{  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye DLO#_t^v.  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract yr)e."#S  
between studies because of different methodologies and |aj]]l[@S  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well `:2np{  
as the different age structures of the study populations. |7.X)h`  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of r^S o qom3  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. K k^!P*#  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity z; >O5 a>z  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. $>Gf;k  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the d8WEsQ+)A  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. R G/P]  
80 McCarty et al. ) urUa E  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort !H @nAz  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total F^!mgU X  
(years) (%) (%) (%) "T}HH  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) 2O2d*Ld>  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( Z eWst w7  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) T n,Ifo3  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) ])WIw'L!  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) z7a @'+'  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) s ZokiFJ  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) d"+ _`d=`  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) ! n?j)p.  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) =.9tRq  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) +:z%#D  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) *yW9-(  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) w Qp{ z  
Age-standardized ~s[Yu!(  
(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) >k u7{1)  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract QSOJHRl=C  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. L/O:V^1  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 q,j` _ R4  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the ,Lw '3  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude &MP8.( u `  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the 79U 7<]-!  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). iHyA;'!Os  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains +@ #-S  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban 1;+(HB  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than  iS28p  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, N_E :?Jo  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in O[&G6+  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, 71Mk!E=1  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens T<ekDhlr  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. cUr'mb  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable <1E* wPm8  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, 4_?*@L1  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that Jm G)=$,  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and [Uu!:SZ  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is C$EvcF% 1  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted 9=;ETLL "  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement ^2um.`8  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We _6Fj&mw(u  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction q oVp@=\:"  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have :+|os"  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this 1:lhZFZ  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their $+a2CZs!  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants X2p9KC  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the vc(6lN9>  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ b 7bbrR8  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their ySwvjP7f  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to lTpmoDa%  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change %8yX6`lH  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function geu8$^  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in g4^df%)&  
overall quality of life.22 9rsty{J8  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually j*jO809%^  
significant posterior capsule opacification following `7zNVYur8  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% ]`x\Oj &  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated we&g9j'  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear )/F1,&/N`e  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an YS5Pt)?  
opaque capsule. 64OgE!  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and %maLo RJ  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, 3yu{Q z5y,  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We N8| ;X  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more .q1OT>  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is j6KGri  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 *a7&v3X  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any Q1Sf7)  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of Y&k6Xhuao  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care ;$\d^i{N  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without `\:9 2+  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the wU#79:h  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated 0 ej!!WP  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. L+PrV y  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem +_ HPZo  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract F~dq7 AS  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will }F1|& A  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the ZgL4$%  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in zM^ux!T=  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well W ,i SN}  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes /u }AgIb  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. N6Fj} m&E  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract ;Bo{.916  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for H/p<lp  
cataract extractions increases. $Blo`'  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Z_Ox'  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants h*f=  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the %QUV351H  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell Q9N=yz  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and h5G>FPM-=  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient 8W 9%NW3&  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal O&=?,zLO[  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. #~54t0|Cd>  
REFERENCES 9N|O*h1;u  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. R/M:~h~F!  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. t i)foam  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, B&_62`  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population $WvI%r  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. 8@|_];9#.  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens 4`G":nE?We  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated A+3@N99HeH  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. wHk4BWg-  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related G6xdGUM  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. BclZsU=xn  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. HH3WZ^0>  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye -<a~kVv  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population 9 kzytx  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: AZxx%6  
363–71. )JTh=w4n|z  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. g>x2[//pk  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye 5.#r\' Z#  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. ts3%cRN r  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. Y:]~~-f\~  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient `!DrB08A  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. * I`, L/  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. 1agyT  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated ;14[)t$  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. FZz\z p  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. D,dmlv  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too 3'O+  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal &@c=$+#C  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: I)V2cOrXM  
77–80. qiiX49}{  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice R{5Qb?&wOp  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? M5HKRLt  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. \i}n1Qd  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest NTuS(7m  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye [ECSJc&i  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic 7qV_QZ!.  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. V"*|`z)  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading K!"[,=u_  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. {7[^L1  
82 McCarty et al. EQ8jxr<p  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & cfMj^*I  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. FEw51a+V  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume w#U3h]>,  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International +|).dm  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. 1bF aQ50t  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and IrjKI.PR  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. 4~hd{8  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison 2)h i(  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased #+|{l*>  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment \$T  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. $SRpFz5y$  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the ~tn*y4uK  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health |3/=dG  
Organization, 1997. J"yO\Y  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, UGj!I  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation [94A?pn[z  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. iUFS1SN \  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. >K1)XP  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of ^]( sCE7  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative =21$U [  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. ;"-(QE?Mv  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. QxH%4 )?  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated "6 |j 0?Q  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. *%7[{Loz  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. *9y)B|P^  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract iagl^(s  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and >0Y >T6!  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. I'HPy.PV  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. /17Qhex  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to VdjS\VYe,  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. fz\C$[+u  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. <{ GpAf8-  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A :JH#*5%gQ:  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule rn $a)^!  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. &a5UQ>  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. Xyy;B O:  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health aUa.!,_dh  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. ~U(`XvR\4  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in 0uV 3J  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, WvR-0>E  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract v_mk{  
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