Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology
Ik:G5m<ta 2006;
)M8d\] 34
b<u\THy# : 880–885
/$; Z ~^P doi:10.1111/j.1442-9071.2006.01342.x
(qA
F2& © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
<-`bWz=+ 3p#UEH3 Correspondence:
kepuh%KY[
Dr Garry Brian, 5 Hazelmere Parade, Sherwood, Qld 4075, Australia. Email:
grbrian@tpg.com.au PF4[;ES' Received 11 April 2006; accepted 19 June 2006.
4phCn5 Original Article
#aqnj+ Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea
C
>OeULD Jambi N Garap
~A0AB
`7 MMed(Ophthal)
30h[&Oc ,
LW=qX%o
{ 1,2
1RkN^FZOxq Sethu Sheeladevi
HS=w9:, MHM
ckX8eg!f ,
HG7Qdw2+O 3
Zl5DlRuw Garry Brian
SrA6}kS FRANZCO
M.g2y &8 ,
v8-szW)
. 2,4
sD3Ts;k BR Shamanna
Q}&'1J MD
RlfI]uC
DM ,
-n:2US< 3
C5=^cH8 Praveen K Nirmalan
t(}Y /' MPH
2K~v`c*4 3
P#pb48^- and Carmel Williams
ygTfQtN MA
6?"Gj}|r 4
5+GTK)D 1
z7fX!'3V The Fred Hollows Foundation – Papua New Guinea Eye Care Program,
bP:u`!p
-i 2
"4XjABJ4' Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine and Health
K%9!1' Sciences, University of Papua New Guinea, Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea;
qLBQ!>lR
3
8?~>FLWTXZ International Center for Advancement of Rural Eye Care,
Lh+7z>1 L.V. Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India; and
Njo.-k 4
oKRI2ni$j9 The Fred Hollows Foundation (New Zealand), Auckland, New Zealand
,9OER!$y Key words:
*`s*l+0b blindness
RCkmxO;b& ,
EhW@iYL cataract
TPJuS)TU9 ,
&w_8E+YZ Papua New Guinea
f`}u9!jVR ,
9aID&b+ surgery
{s@&3i?ZiC ,
I/h( *~/ vision impairment
RG1#\d-fE .
T5[(vTp I
?:PF;\U NTRODUCTION
&sq q+&ao Just north of Australia, tropical Papua New Guinea (PNG)
N,)rrBD has more than five million people spread across several major
`=TJw,q and hundreds of other smaller islands. Almost 50% of the
h#h)=; land area is mountainous, and 85% of inhabitants are rural
Ob'[W;p)[w dwellers. Forty per cent of the population is age 14 years or
<t *3w younger, and 9% is 50 years or older.
\a:-xwUu< 1
`C:J {` Papua New Guinea was administered by Australia until
f+Bv8 g 1975, when independence was granted. Since that time, governance,
o<S(ODOfi particularly budgetary, economic performance, law
&53LJlL
Co and justice, and development and management of basic
l%cE o`U health and other services have declined. Today, 37% of the
7*&q"
population is said to live below the poverty line, personal
%Y].i/".;P and property security are problematic, and health is poor.
jW|M)[KJN There are significant and growing economic, health and education
cj3P]2B# disparities between urban and rural inhabitants.
Ut"F b Papua New Guinea has one referral hospital, in Port
ma2-66M~j Moresby. This has an eye clinic with one part-time and two
M[dJQ( full-time consultant ophthalmologists, and several ophthalmology
nrZZk QNI training registrars. There are also two private ophthalmologists
_%aJ/Y0Cy in the city. Elsewhere, four provincial hospitals
rcMSso2 have eye clinics, each with one consultant ophthalmologist.
O
Egp!J One of these, supported by Christian Blind Mission and
G
Y ]bw based at Goroka, provides an extensive outreach service.
jTz~
V&^ Visiting Australian and New Zealand ophthalmology teams
a^GJR]]
{ and an outreach team from Port Moresby General Hospital
$]]|#}J provide some 6 weeks of provincial service per year.
n#5%{e> Cataract and its surgery account for a significant proportion
F| O of ophthalmic resource allocation and services delivered
6M_,4>
- in PNG. Although the National Department of Health keeps
U>
1v oc some service-related statistics, and cataract has been considered
b\Gw|?Rv in three PNG publications of limited value (two district
}EWPLJA service reports
f+W %X 2,3
s(Llz]E~ZX and a community assessment
/aD3E"Op 4
t5WW3$Nf ), there has
]eZrb%B. been no systematic assessment of cataract or its surgery.
dJD8c2G A
0T7""^'&
BSTRACT
.:=G=v=1 Purpose:
mXXU{IwUe To determine the prevalence of visually significant
w0L+Sj db cataract, unoperated blinding cataract, and cataract surgery
avo[~ `. for those aged 50 years and over in Papua New Guinea.
o79EDPX Also, to determine the characteristics, rate, coverage and
`8D}\w<eI outcome of cataract surgery, and barriers to its uptake.
z8\z`#g! Methods:
\bPSy0 Using the World Health Organization Rapid
Wc
q
UF"A Assessment of Cataract Surgical Services protocol, a population-
}grel5lq based cross-sectional survey was conducted in
7$u}uv`j 2005. By two-stage cluster random sampling, 39 clusters of
`suEN@
^ 30 people were selected. Each eye with a presenting visual
.8EaFEd acuity worse than 6/18 and/or a history of cataract surgery
5b5Hc Inu was examined.
5:sk&0:@U Results:
Hlj_oDL
Of the 1191 people enumerated, 98.6% were
#%$U-ti examined. The 50 years and older age-gender-adjusted
3q*p#l~ prevalence of cataract-induced vision impairment (presenting
zt|DHVy acuity less than 6/18 in the better eye) was 7.4% (95%
nkAS]sC confidence interval [CI]: 6.4, 10.2, design effect [deff]
%!r@l7< =
\]=''C=J 1.3).
o!-kwtw`l That for cataract-caused functional blindness (presenting
6A23H7 acuity less than 6/60 in the better eye) was 6.4% (95% CI:
U1^3 &N8 5.1, 7.3, deff
|%l&H/ =
me@xl} 1.1). The latter was not associated with
xg8$ <Ut gender (
h1AZ+9 P
?)V?6"fFP =
EwX:^1f 0.6). For the sample, Cataract Surgical Coverage
;5PBZ<w at 6/60 was 34.5% for Eyes and 45.3% for Persons. The
<A
`zK Cataract Surgical Rate for Papua New Guinea was less than
+
ko-oZ7V 500 per million population per year. The age-genderadjusted
F+Q(^Nk prevalence of those having had cataract surgery
*mtS\J was 8.3% (95% CI: 6.6, 9.8, deff
Q8
=
DT#F?@LG( 1.3). Vision outcomes of
*1c1XN<7 surgery did not meet World Health Organization guidelines.
NPjNkpWm&= Lack of awareness was the most common reason for not
'S#D+oF(1~ seeking and undergoing surgery.
'LW~_\ Conclusion:
9[,+4&wX7 Increasing the quantity and quality of cataract
1}ER+;If surgery need to be priorities for Papua New Guinea eye
~U$ioQy< care services.
6O\a\z Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 881
EaN1xb(DYa © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
!si}m~K!_ This paper reports the cataract-related aspects of a population-
He)vl. based cross-sectional rapid assessment survey of
T7#}&> those 50 years and older in PNG.
wzf%~ats M
&<
oJw TC ETHODS
`PS^o# The National Ethical Clearance Committee of The Medical
*Eg[@5;QA Research Advisory Committee granted ethics approval to
?M9?GodbP. survey aspects of eye health and care in Papua New Guinea
HIsB)W&%@ (MRAC No. 05/13). This study was performed between
K.r
"KxCm| December 2004 and March 2005, and used the validated
G/4~_\YMq World Health Organization (WHO) Rapid Assessment of
KybrSa Cataract Surgical Services
uq\[^ 5,6
+[Bl@RHe^ protocol. Characterization of
2#)z%K6T cataract and its surgery in the 50 years and over age group
"|nh=!L was part of that study.
IutU~%wv As reported elsewhere,
Ye]-RN/W 7
$A^OP{ the sample size required, using a
}s@vN8C prevalence of bilateral cataract functional blindness (presenting
4Qj@:b visual acuity worse than 6/60 in both eyes) of 5% in the
1<F6{?,z target population, precision of
2P,{`O1] ±
VI k]`)# 20%, with 95% confidence
+j(7.6ia intervals (CI), and a design effect (deff) of 1.3 (for a cluster
cI (} size of 30 persons), was estimated as 1169 persons. The
m8<.TCIQ sample frame used for the survey, based on logistics and
'#NDR:J" security considerations, included Koki wanigela settlement
Ctx{rf_~ in the Port Moresby area (an urban population), and Rigo
IN?6~O
p coastal district (a rural population, effectively isolated from
P2g}G4qf Port Moresby despite being only 2–4 h away by road). From
1~y\MD*-j this sample frame, 39 clusters (with probability proportionate
G'{*guYU to population size) were chosen, using a systematic random
C`["4 sampling strategy.
[!Zyp`: Within each cluster, the supervisor chose households
a[ yyEgm2 using a random process. Residency was defined as living in
F*p@hl that cluster household for 6 months or more over the past
S7(tGD year, and sharing meals from a common kitchen with other
Xq%ijo members of the household. Eligible resident subjects aged
5%]O'h 50 years and older were then enumerated by trained volunteers
0aa&13!5 from the Port Moresby St John Ambulance Services.
ypWhH This continued until 30 subjects were enrolled. If the
( 9(NP_s required number of subjects was not obtained from a particular
[sZ,nB/ cluster, the fieldworkers completed enrolment in the
mbXW$E-&R2 nearest adjacent cluster. Verbal informed consent was
6r)B|~,OA obtained prior to all data collection and examinations.
Oid;s!-S 6 A standardized survey record was completed for each
g3TqTs participant. The volunteers solicited demographic and general
l*b0uF information, and any history of cataract surgery. They
+6s6QeNS8 also measured visual acuity. During a methodology pilot in
B4{F)Zb the Morata settlement area of Port Moresby, the kappa statistic
#B5-3CwB for agreement between the four volunteers designated
tZygTvK/S to perform visual acuity estimations was over 0.85.
(p(-E The widely accepted and used ‘presenting distance visual
"c*#
ZP acuity’ (with correction if the subject was using any), a measure
4F,RlKHBl of ocular condition and access to and uptake of eye care
HX
gf=R/$ services, was determined for each eye separately. This was
MCTTm^8O done in daylight, using Snellen illiterate E optotypes, with
^C~t)U four correct consecutive or six of eight showings of the
Q|7;Zsd: smallest discernible optotype giving the level. For any eye
%Mf3OtPiJW with presenting visual acuity worse than 6/18, pinhole acuity
/! M%9gu was also measured.
l} W">
yQ0 An ophthalmologist examined all eyes with a history of
I@ D<rjR cataract surgery and/or reduced presenting vision. Assessment
m6o o-muAr of the anterior segment was made using a torch and
6 -IThC loupe magnification. In a dimly lit room, through an undilated
U]"6KS
pupil, the status of the visually important central lens
dC?l%,W was determined with a direct ophthalmoscope. An intact red
Vkl]&mYRz reflex was considered indicative of a ‘normal’ clear central
+oiuulA lens. The presence of obvious red reflex dark shading, but
Lv@'v4.({ transparent vitreous, was recorded as lens opacity. Where
(S8hr,%n present, aphakia and pseudophakia with and without posterior
^t P|8k capsule opacification were noted. The lens was determined
86W.z6 to be not visible if there were dense corneal opacities
*a' I or other ocular pathologies, such as phthisis bulbi, precluding
M<xF4L3] any view of the lens. The posterior segment was examined
41c4Xj?' with a direct ophthalmoscope, also through an
K%YR; )5A undilated pupil.
!wIrI/P7# A cause of vision loss was determined for each eye with
j=Z;M1 a presenting visual acuity worse than 6/18. In the absence of
nxs'qX(D any other findings, uncorrected refractive error was considered
D YTC2 to be that cause if the acuity then improved to better
y)T|1) than 6/18 with pinhole. Other causes, including corneal
V BjA$. opacity, cataract and diabetic retinopathy, required clinical
),I g u findings of sufficient magnitude to explain the level of vision
_.5ABE loss. Although any eye may have more than one condition
)b-
KF}]d contributing to vision reduction, for the purposes of this
K5 Z'kkOk study, a single cause of vision loss was determined for each
S{UEV7d:n0 eye. The attributed cause was the condition most easily
jUB`=d| treated if each of the contributing conditions was individually
.<Jq8J treatable to a vision of 6/18 or better. Thus, for example,
v8\pOI}c when uncorrected refractive error and lens opacity coexisted,
h
%! ,|[| refractive error, with its easier and less expensive treatment,
`Lr|KuFN was nominated as the cause. Where treatment of a condition
S~V?Qe@&Z present would not result in 6/18 or better acuity, it was
W@61rT}c determined to be the cause rather than any coincident or
Zi.w+V associated conditions amenable to treatment. Thus, for
IaGF{O3. example, coincident retinal detachment and cataract would
}XfRKGQw be categorized as ‘posterior segment pathology’.
v+
"9& Participants who were functionally blind (less than 6/60
NQ,2pM<*- in the better eye) because of unoperated cataract were interrogated
nOK1Wc%/' about the reasons for not having surgery. The
JjQ9AJ?-V responses were closed ended and respondents had the option
@"0n8y of volunteering more than one barrier, all of which were
V0y_c^x recorded in a piloted proforma. The first four reasons offered
0yL%Pjn6 were considered for analysis of the barriers to cataract
j
\2q2_f surgery.
>RXDuCVi Those eyes previously operated for cataract were examined
j_}f6d/h to characterize that surgery and the vision outcome. A
_OJ19 Ry detailed history of the surgery was taken. This included the
!Z%pdqo`. age at surgery, place of surgery, cost and the use of spectacles
[+b&)jN*2 afterward, including reasons for not wearing them if that was
Z)G@ahOQ the case.
n
w The Rapid Assessment of Cataract Surgical Services data
]gmkajCzD entry and analysis software package was used. The prevalences
(BY5omlh of visually significant cataract, unoperated blinding
-{eI6#z|\A cataract and cataract surgery were determined. Where prevalence
xU'% 6/G estimates were age and gender adjusted for the population
F"t.ND of PNG, the estimated population structure for the
9^^:Y3j 882 Garap
_hi8mo et al.
g UA_&_ © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
M[?0 ^ FBx year 2000
+D|E8sz8 1
"M=1Eb$6= was used, and 95% CI were derived around these
r*t\F&D point estimates. Additional analysis for potential associations
'<&rMn of cataract, its surgery and surgical outcomes employed the
qp2&Z8S\D STATA (version 8.0; StataCorp LP, TX, USA). Fisher’s exact
CF/8d6}Vf test and the chi-square test for bivariate analysis and a multiple
xoN?[ logistic regression model for multivariate analysis were
`r*bG= used. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% CI were estimated. A
^"EK:|Y4%K P
<{1=4PA -
Ll0"<G2t value of
RV_+-m{] <
j~k+d$a 0.05 was taken as significant for this analysis.
S3> <zGYk The Cataract Surgical Coverage (Eyes) (CSC(Eyes)) was
E>k!d'+tb calculated. This is a surgical service impact indicator. It measures
I.u[9CI7HU the proportion of cataract that has been operated on
GJn ~x in a defined population at a particular point in time, being
aX|LEZ;D> the eyes having had cataract surgery as a percentage of the
yPVK>em5 combined total of all of those eyes operated with those
a_o99lP currently blind (less than 6/60) from cataract (CSC(Eyes) at
v?`DP 6/60
$Ce;}sM =
{Zrf>ST 100
i|QL6e*0 a
,nz3S5~ /(
c^`(5}39v a
v}BXH4 &Y +
<,I]=+A b
8&UwnEk< ), where
#wfb-`,5&9 a
C,nU.0 =
pX]"^f1?O pseudophakic
^4[|&E: +
c<]~q1 aphakic eyes,
=SLCG. and
uZ8^" W b
-VkPy<) =
%
n~
'UA eyes with worse than 6/60 vision caused by cataract).
q1vsvL9Q 8
Vc$y^|= The Cataract Surgical Coverage (Persons) (CSC(Persons))
i'`[dwfS was determined. This considers people with operated
ZCz#B2Sf8 cataract (either or both eyes) as a proportion of those having
J~k'b2(p3 operable cataract. (CSC(Persons) at 6/60
[WW ~SOJe =
%3mh'Z -[f 100(
8N9X1Mb| x
FgTWym_ +
5;q{9wvqO y
i4H,Ggb )/
.+$ox-EK8 (
a/dq+ x
(.N!(;G +
aYws{Vii y
Ji7<UJ30x +
Q$8&V}jVW z
sglH=0MP ), in which
*m*sg64Zw x
$c }-/U 8 =
rWNywxnT persons with unilateral pseudophakia
Lf+"Gp or unilateral aphakia and worse than 6/60 vision
tzrvIVD caused by cataract in the other eye,
2./;i>H[u y
(Fs{~4T =
%3@-.= persons with bilateral
"WZ | previously operated cataract, and
Cxra(!& z
VCQo3k5
{ =
v:?l C<, persons with bilateral
2(H-q( cataract causing vision worse than 6/60 in each).
6os{q`/Q]) 8
.X34[AXd The Cataract Surgical Rate, being the number of cataract
do:IkjU~ operations per year per million of population, was also
~DP_1V? estimated.
aKz:hG R
#*X\pjZ ESULTS
7>
8L%(7 Of the 1191 people enumerated, 5 subjects were not available
il% u)NN during the survey and 12 refused participation. Data
CN:z
*g from these 17 were not considered in the analysis. Of the
B}0!b7! remaining 1174 (98.6%), 606 (51.6%) were female, and 914
zD;k|"e (77.9%) were domiciled in rural Rigo.
(nAL;:$x2 Cataract caused 35.2% of vision impairment (presenting
ym_p49 vision less than 6/18) and 62.8% of functional blindness
u(i=-PN_< (presenting vision less than 6/60) in the 2348 eyes sampled
ZlP+t> (Table 1). It was second to refractive error (45.7%)
GA;h7 7
+`tk LvM in the
($-m}UF\/ former, and the leading cause of the latter.
f$ 7C 5 For the 1174 subjects, cataract was the most prevalent
<iB5& cause of vision impairment (46.7%) and functional blindness
y/+IPR (75.0%) (Table 1). On bivariate analysis, increasing age
FG^lh (
</2 aQn P
0o!mlaU# <
d,toU I 0.001), illiteracy (
QJ!2Vw4K P
{
&Vt]9 <
%OOkPda 0.001) and unemployment
Jj?HOtaM (
4:5M,p P
G.`},c;A- <
3&mpn, 0.001) were associated with cataract-induced functional
x#gZC1$Y blindness. Gender was not significantly associated (
i%[+C P
F?[1m2 =
CK1A$$gnz 0.6).
HLOrDlj7 In a multivariate model that included all variables found
"$pbK: significant in bivariate analysis, increasing age (reference category
4}s'xMT! 50–59 years; OR: 2.6, 95% CI: 1.6, 5.9 for persons
S`$%C=a. aged 60–69, OR: 9.8, 95% CI: 4.6, 20.6 for persons aged
2vh }:A_ 70–79, and OR: 18.6, 95% CI: 8.3, 41.9 for persons aged
4EmdQn 80 years and older) and illiteracy (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.3, 3.8)
'~
H`Ffd. were associated with functional cataract blindness.
NGJst_ The survey sample included 97 people (8.3%) who had
D, Gv nfY previously undergone cataract surgery, for a total of 136 eyes
d%. |MAE (5.8%). On bivariate analysis, increasing age (
yjsj+K
pL P
;!G#Y
Oe =
K_~kL0=4 0.02), male
_",<at gender (
4\5i}MIS0 P
:P/VBX h =
;i\N!T{> 0.02), literacy (
Wy}^5]R0E P
')0@J` <
^lt2,x 0.001) and employed status
x"g)pGsT (
ox%j_P9@: P
>}\s-/ =
;N?(R\*8 0.03) were associated with cataract surgery. Illiteracy
DH%PkGn was significantly associated with reduced uptake of cataract
R~T} surgery (adjusted OR 0.43, 95% CI: 0.20, 0.91) in a multivariate
3>^]r jFw model that adjusted for age, gender and employment
|Y05 *!\P* status.
V:'F_/&X? The CSC(Eyes) at 6/60 for the survey sample was
qFwt^w 34.5%, and the CSC(Persons) at the same vision level was
) WbWp4 45.3%.
!u@P\8M} Most cataract surgery occurred in a government hospital
r
dSL (
r'j88)^ P
VC/-5'_6 <
;b*qunJ3L 0.001), more than 5 years ago (
.Y{x!Q" P
E`I(x&_ <
?bVIH? 0.001). Also, most
]sqLGmUL of the intracapsular extractions were performed more than
ofV0L 5 years ago (
>fzyD(> P
ioD8- <
F0p=|W 0.001). Patients are now more likely to
yy=hCjQ) receive intraocular lens surgery (
0S$k;q P
+4_, , I <
zP%s] >hH 0.001). Although most
\hgd&H0UU surgery was provided free (
BYX c
'K P
Hvm}@3F| =
9GH5 0.02), males, who were more
v,ZYh w likely to have surgery (
wK-VA$;: P
4F|79U # =
qisvGHo 0.02), were also more likely to
H]R/=OYBUh pay for it (
P M [_0b P
5<dg@,\ =
+Pb:<WT}% 0.03) (Table 2).
*^|\#UIk
As measured by presenting acuity, the vision outcomes of
"jum*<QZz both intracapsular surgery and intraocular lens surgery were
hJ{u!:4 poor (Table 3). However, 62.6% of those people with at least
XeI2<=@% Table 1.
]##aAh-P4& Vision impairment and blindness by eye and person; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
AhN3~/u%7 Category 2348 eyes/1174 people surveyed
6XW
NJb Vision impairment Blindness
d=xjLbsZ Eye (presenting
h5'hP>b# visual acuity less than 6/18)
kP%hgZ Person (presenting visual
'NlhLu acuity less than 6/18 in the
Sk|e#{ better eye)
w li cuY? Eye (presenting visual
5U~KYy^v acuity less than 6/60)
'|SO7}`;Q Person (presenting visual
wu.l-VmGp) acuity less than 6/60 in the
qS+;u`s better eye)
rQimQ|+ Total Cataract Total Cataract Total Cataract Total Cataract
}N[X<9^Z
n
UUV5uDe>i %
;98&5X\u< n
:0l+x0l} %
VC88re` n
>)ekb7 %
h
~ k<" n
0P5VbDv$r7 %
TWp w/osW n
[Y](Y3 /.N %
@JbxGi n
-O *_+8f %
B"&-) ( n
Nu"v
.]Y2 %
ytIPY7E n
wb.yGfJ %
M~2Us{ ` 50–59 years 266 27.9 49 14.6 84 22.8 23 13.4 74 18.0 37 14.3 17 14.2 10 11.1
jKml:)k 60–69 years 298 31.3 93 27.8 121 32.9 50 29.1 119 29.0 67 26.0 31 25.8 18 20.0
_c>ww<*3 70–79 years 252 26.5 119 35.5 106 28.8 57 33.1 133 32.4 94 36.4 42 35.0 34 37.8
*-9i<@|(U^ 80
J
8%gC +
nc;eNB years 136 14.3 74 22.1 57 15.5 42 24.4 85 20.6 60 23.3 30 25.0 28 31.1
0 %~~IT}U Male 467 49.1 157 46.9 180 48.9 77 44.8 203 49.4 123 47.7 59 49.2 41 45.6
J>A9]%M Female 485 50.9 178 53.1 188 51.1 95 55.2 208 50.6 135 52.3 61 50.8 49 54.4
aoey
5hts All cases 952 100 335 35.2 368 100 172 46.7 411 100 258 62.8 120 100 90 75
L(;$(k-/( Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 883
]:gW+6w"C © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
w#b@6d one eye operated on for cataract felt that their uncorrected
_2jL]mB vision, using either or both eyes, was sufficiently good that
"UTW(~D' spectacles were not required (Table 3).
r'*$'QY-N ‘Lack of awareness of cataract and the possibility of surgery’
N#ggT9>X was the most common (50.1%) reason offered by 90
c~vhkRA cataract-induced functionally blind individuals for not seeking
5pJe`}O4 and undergoing cataract surgery. Males were more likely
s/7Z.\ to believe that they could not afford the surgery (P = 0.02),
f}bq and females were more frequently afraid of undergoing a
A08kwYxiW cataract extraction (P = 0.03) (Table 4).
M(a%Qk?]/ DISCUSSION
>%tG[jb The limitations of the standardized rapid assessment methodology
@R5^J{T used for this study are discussed elsewhere.7 Caution
]6e(-v!U should be exercised when extrapolating this survey’s
r?/Uu
& Table 2. Circumstances of cataract surgery; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
u!K1K3T6k Category 136 cataract surgeries
01'>[h#_n Male Female Aphakia
EX8+3>) (n = 74)
Yj@Sy Pseudophakia
xh2r?K@k> (n = 60)
;U=b6xE Couched
S~3|1Hw*tN (n = 2)
n<C]
6H Male, n (%) 83 (61.0) 45 (60.8) 38 (63.3) 0 (0.0)
jfMkN Female, n (%) 53 (39.0) 29 (39.2) 22 (36.7) 2 (100)
Cx2#
0$ Undergone surgery in the last 5 years, n (%) 19 (22.9) 20 (37.7) 10 (13.5) 29 (48.3) 0 (0.0)
r-y;"h' Range of age at the time of surgery, years 39–84 40–87 39–87 45–85 52
7W)W9=&BT 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
nB`|VYmOP1 Surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 72 (86.7) 44 (83.0) 63 (85.1) 53 (88.3) 0 (0.0)
6.)ug7aF Surgery in a private hospital, n (%) 10 (12.1) 7 (13.2) 10 (13.5) 7 (11.7) 0 (0.0)
gF,=rT1:>r Surgery in an eye camp, n (%) 1 (1.2) 0 (0.0) 1 (1.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
,'0#q Surgery by traditionalist, n (%) 0 (0.0) 2 (3.8) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 2 (100)
'W(u. Totally free surgery, n (%) 32 (38.6) 26 (49.1)
M 2hZ' Paid full price asked for surgery, n (%) 25 (30.1) 14 (26.4)
A`uHZCwJ5 Paid partial price asked for surgery, n (%) 26 (31.3) 13 (24.5)
ID_4M_G Totally free surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 55 (47.4)
o-@01_j
Full price surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 23 (19.8)
ZPH_s^ Partially paid surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 38 (32.8)
g[(@@TiG Table 3. Characterization of cataract surgery outcomes; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
?"Ez (a) 136 cataract surgeries
`PbY(6CF (b) 97 people with at least one eye operated on for cataract
8_}t,BC (c) 67 (69.1%) cataract operated people not currently using distance correction: 38 (56.7%) male; 29 (43.3%) female
A&M_ J Aphakia Pseudophakia Couched
Pg8.RvmQ n % n % n %
$bG*f*w Total 74 54.4 60 44.1 2 1.5
vqN/ crJ@ Presenting vision 6/18 or better 27 36.5 24 40 0 0.0
J!l/.:`6 Presenting vision worse than 6/60 40 54.1 11 18.3 2 100
[_JdV(]$ Aphakia Pseudophakia‡ Couched
Ca'BE#q Unilateral† Bilateral n % n %
`-{l$Hn9|~ n % n %
H1c8]} Total 28 28.9 17 17.5 51 52.6 1 1.0
Ss%Cf6qdWL Presenting vision 6/18 or better in better eye 15 53.6 11 64.7 35 68.6 0 0.0
_p6r5Y Presenting vision worse than 6/60 in better eye 13 46.4 3 17.6 9 17.6 1 100
!An?<Sv$ Reason n %
FygNWI ' Never provided 20 29.9
tM]Gu?6 Damaged 2 3.0
{rcN_N% Lost 3 4.5
$sY'=S Do not need 42 62.6
`o{ Z;-OF †Unilateral aphakes with an unoperated contralateral eye. ‡Bilateral pseudophakes (n = 9) + those with one eye aphakic and the other
~-k,$J?7 pseudophakic (n = 12) + unilateral pseudophakes with an unoperated contralateral eye (n = 30).
]owgsR
884 Garap et al.
7<)H?;~; © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
cjN)3L{ results to the entire population of PNG. However, this
Ga5s9wC study’s results are the most systematically collected and
r2SZC`Z}-M objective currently available for eye care service planning.
:2KHiT5 Based on this survey sample, the age-gender-adjusted
trDw|WA prevalence of vision impairment from all causes for those
y-26\eY^P 50 years and older in PNG is 29.2% (95% CI: 27.6, 35.1,
x\Q}fk?{t deff = 2.3), with 13.1% (95% CI: 11.3, 15.1, deff = 1.2) due
)IcSdS0@M to uncorrected refractive error.7 Cataract (7.4% [95% CI:
=Smd/'`_ 6.4, 10.2, deff = 1.3]) is the second most frequent cause. The
O(I^:_eH adjusted prevalence for functional blindness from all causes
4 *}H3-` in people aged 50 years and older is 8.9% (95% CI: 8.4, 12.0,
Pp }Z" deff = 1.2),7 with cataract the leading cause at 6.4% (95%
}OEL] 5 CI: 5.1, 7.3, deff = 1.1). This is typical of developing countries.
i6HRG\9nU However, atypically, it would seem that cataract blindness
^"7-`<J in PNG is not associated with female gender.9
xF{%@t Assuming that ‘negligible’6 cataract blindness (less than
'/<\X{l8 5% at visual acuity less than 3/60,8 although it may be as
^5s7mls much as 10–15% at less than 6/6010) occurs in the under
7R6B}B?/ 50 years age group, then, based on a 2005 population estimate
/!0&b? of 5.545 million, PNG would be expected to currently
KyrZ&E.` have 32 000 (25 000–36 000) cataract-blind people. An
(qFZF7(Xa additional 5000 people in the 50 years and older age group
!AXLoq$SY will have cataract-reduced vision (6/60 and better, but less
;)h?P.] than 6/18), along with an unknown number under the age of
%!t9)pNc 50 years.
5,
,'hAq_ The age-gender-adjusted prevalence of those 50 years
G%HG6
and older in PNG having had cataract surgery is 8.3% (95%
P@@MQ[u?!. CI: 6.6, 9.8, deff = 1.3). Prevalences for males and females,
C:No ^nH> respectively, are 10.2% (95% CI: 7.7, 12.7) and 6.4% (95%
SAq.W"ri CI: 4.5, 8.4), with the expected9 association with male gender
lt-3OcC (age adjusted OR 1.6, 95% CI: 1.2, 2.1). Assuming negligible
t#(=$ cataract surgery is performed on those under age
m4~
|z 50 years (noting mean age and age range of surgery in
oF$#7#0`;8 Table 2), there would be about 41 400 people in PNG today
0p.MH~mx who have had this surgery. In the survey sample, 28.7% of
Lp-$Ie surgery occurred in the last 5 years (Table 2). Assuming that
"y~*1kBu there have been no deaths, annual surgical numbers have
Iq%<E:+GL been steady during this time, and a population mean of the
564L.^$@| 2000 and 2005 estimates, this would equate to about 2400
CN(-Jd.b people per year, being a Cataract Surgical Rate (CSR) of
+pgHCzwJE approximately 440 per million per year.
ux
n+.fA Unfortunately, no operation numbers are available from
&-FG}|*4M the private Port Moresby facility, which contributed 12.5%
Il4]1d| (Table 2) of the surgeries in this study. However, from
Pqx?0f) records and estimates, outreach, government and mission
vcj(=\
e8v hospital surgical services perform approximately 1600 cataract
Q\s+w){f% surgeries per year. Excluding the private hospital, this
nGWy4rY2S equates to a CSR of about 300 per million population per
,{G\-(\ year.
NV?x<LNWd Whatever the exact CSR, certainly less than the WHO
a$?d_BX estimate of 716,11 the order of magnitude is typical of a
SrNc country with PNG’s medical infrastructure, resourcing and
jMBMqQNU bureacratic capability.11 With the exception of the Christian
+a*Ic8* Blind Mission surgeon, who performs in excess of 1000 cases
ZDaHR-%Y per year, PNG’s ophthalmologists operate, on average, on
~q+AAWL fewer than 100 cataracts each per year. This is also typical.6
5JaLE5- It will be evident that the current surgical capability in
u9Adu` PNG is insufficient to address the cataract backlog. The
8F<|.V; CSC(Persons) of 45.3%, relating directly to the prevalence
}l+_KA of bilateral cataract blindness, and CSC(Eyes) of 34.5%,
N`7O
J)l relating to the total surgical workload, are in keeping with
bBML +0a other developing countries.6,8,10 If an annual cataract blindness
qF^P\cD incidence of 20% of prevalence12 is accepted, and surgery
z[ ;n2o|s is only performed on one eye of each person, then 6400
5N>f l
Q (5000–7200) surgeries need to be performed annually to meet
1H.;r(c this. While just addressing the incidence, in time the backlog
wQ+il6 will reduce to near zero. This would require a three- or
@i'D)6sC fourfold increase in CSR, to about 1200. Despite planning
GQ?FUFuIoW for this and the best of intentions, given current circumstances
NG3:= in PNG, this seems unlikely to occur in the near future.
zqU$V~5;rG Increasing the output of surgical services of itself will be
F$4=7Njv insufficient to reduce cataract-related blindness. As measured
Q'cWqr by presenting acuity, the outcome of cataract surgery is poor
gktlwiCZ (Table 3). Neither the historical intracapsular or current
^F?B_' intraocular lens surgical techniques approach WHO outcome
c8]%,26. guidelines of more than 80% with 6/18 and better
XFs7kTY presenting vision, and less than 5% presenting functionally
_&q&ID blind.13 Better outcomes are required to ensure scarce
r9(c<E?,h Table 4. Reasons that cataract-blind (worse than 6/60) people do not seek or undergo cataract surgery; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea
Y:+:>[F (2005)
D->E& # 90 people functionally blind due to cataract
_"D J|j Responses by 41
SZ4y\I males (45.6%)
NR&a
er Responses by 49
QHje} females (54.4%)
q4@+Pi) Responses by all
l0yflFGr n % n % n %
Q$'\_zV Lack of awareness of cataract and the possibility of surgery 18 43.9 28 57.1 46 50.1
ML$#&Z@
*7 Too old to do anything about vision 7 17.1 6 12.2 13 14.4
>d
.|I& Believes unable to afford surgery 10 24.4 7 14.3 17 18.9
ZA_~o
#0% No time available to attend surgery 4 9.8 6 12.2 10 11.1
*2pE39 Waiting for cataract to mature 4 9.8 5 10.2 9 10.0
h\)ual_r[j None available to accompany person to surgery 4 9.8 2 4.1 6 6.7
|C+
5 Fear of the surgery 2 4.9 6 12.2 8 8.9
uGlz|C Believes no services available 2 4.9 2 4.1 4 4.4
xXV15%& Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 885
wN0?~ © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
m^0*k|9+G resources are well used.14 Routine monitoring of surgical
3PzF^ 8KJ activity and outcome, perhaps more likely to occur if done
3e;K5qSeo/ manually, may contribute to an improvement.15,16 So too
z} VCiS0 would better patient selection, as many currently choose not
Ax!@vL&@ to wear postoperation correction because they see well
1U~'8=- enough with the fellow eye (Table 3). Improving access to
.b*-GWx refraction and spectacles will also likely improve presenting
/oM&29 jy acuities (Table 3).
tnmz5Q Of those cataract blind in the survey, 50.1% claimed to
NlG!_D"(y be unaware of cataract and the possibility of surgery
Q6X}R,KA1 (Table 4). However, even when arrangements, including
7BA9zs392 transportation, were made for study participants with visually
TlQ5'0&I significant cataract to have surgery in Port Moresby, not
cz>`$Zz all availed themselves of this opportunity. The reasons for
^dhtc%
W> this need further investigation.
'(($dT Despite the apparent ignorance of cataract among the
5i3nz=~o population, there would seem little point in raising demand
6ozBU^n and expectations through health promotion techniques until
c*>SZ'T\ such time as the capacity of services and outcomes of surgery
D>q?My have been improved. Increasing the quantity and quality of
O~#OVFJ9= cataract surgery need to be priorities for PNG eye care
CH h6Mnw services. The independent Christian Blind Mission Goroka
Lr(wS { and outreach services, using one surgeon and a wellresourced
J&b&*3
support team, are examples of what is possible,
b9Ix*!Y both in output and in outcome. However, the real challenge
}JWk? is to be able to provide cataract surgery as an integrated part
P\|i<Ds_M of a functioning service offering equitable access to good eye
k{$Mlt?&- health and vision outcomes, from within a public health
w.0]>/C system that needs major attention. To that end, registrar
y {1p
# training and referral hospital facilities and practice are being
!g-19at improved.
~rU{Q>c It may be that the required cataract service improvements
I:#Es. are beyond PNG’s under-resourced and managed public
$y*["~TJ health system. The survey reported here provides a baseline
=G2A Ufn against which progress may be measured.
Ax+q/nvnb ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
q^w3n2 The authors thankfully acknowledge the technical support
e6?h4}[+* provided by Renee du Toit and Jacqui Ramke (The International
^t\AB)(8 Centre for Eyecare Education), Doe Kwarara (FHFPNG
m)9qO7P Eye Care Program) and David Pahau (Eye Clinic, Port
y/@.T\p Moresby General Hospital). Thanks also to the St Johns
^Ru/7pw5 Ambulance Services (Port Moresby) volunteers and staff for
jlZW!$
Iq their invaluable contribution to the fieldwork. This survey
M 9b_Q was funded in part by a program grant from New Zealand
fOyLBixR Agency for International Development (NZAID) to The
C[O \aW Fred Hollows Foundation (New Zealand).
Ls^$E REFERENCES
uU]4)Hp 1. National Statistical Office, Government of the Independent
^*]0quu=z State of PNG. Papua New Guinea 2000 Census. Port Moresby:
8BZDa
iE" PNG Government, 2000.
AcYL3 2. Parsons G. Ophthalmic practice in Papua New Guinea. PNG
0: (@Y Med J 1975; 18: 79–82.
BI] %$r
q 3. Parsons G. A decade of ophthalmic statistics in Papua New
cwxO|
.m Guinea. PNG Med J 1991; 34: 255–61.
^kMgjS}R 4. Dethlefs R. The trachoma status and blindness rates of selected
i- E~ZfJ areas of Papua New Guinea in 1979–80. Aust J Ophthalmol 1982;
3y?ig2 10: 13–18.
H{P"$zj`l 5. WHO. Rapid assessment of cataract surgical services. In: Vision
'q
hA4W9 2020: The Right to Sight: Developing an Action Plan Version 2 CDROM.
NTVdSK7z~H World Health Organization and International Agency
KPUc+`cN% for the Prevention of Blindness, 2004. Available from: http://
4+`<' t]Q www.who.int/ncd/vision2020_actionplan/documents/raccs/ jv]:`$}G\ installation_racss.htm
65Ysg}x 6. Amansakhatov S, Volokhovskaya ZP, Afanasyeva AN, Limburg
.Tdl'y:.. H. Cataract blindness in Turkmenistan: results of a national
%97IXrE survey. Br J Ophthalmol 2002; 86: 1207–10.
sw
nov[0 7. Garap JN, Sheeladevi S, Shamanna BR et al. Blindness and
!G#3jh:kiY vision impairment in the elderly of Papua New Guinea. Clin
]v 6u Experiment Ophthalmol 2006; 34: 335–41.
n}yqpW!%n 8. Limburg H, Foster A. Cataract surgical coverage: an indicator
x1$tS#lS to measure the impact of cataract intervention programmes.
?iUAzM8 Community Eye Health J 1998; 11: 3–6.
Db=
iJ68 9. Lewallen S, Courtright P. Gender and use of cataract surgical
H>`?S{J services in developing countries. Bull World Health Organ 2002;
M,PZ|=V6a 80: 300–3.
y^:g"|q 10. Bassett KL, Noertjojo K, Liu L et al. Cataract surgical coverage
3Cwqy#X#8 and outcome in the Tibet Autonomous Region of China. Br J
>=i47-H Ophthalmol 2005; 89: 5–9.
jpaY:fcF 11. WHO. State of the World’s Sight: Vision 2020: The Right to Sight:
Kig.hHj@ 1999–2005. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2005.
pP)0 l 12. WHO. How to plan cataract intervention in a district. In: Vision
j+J)S1 2020: The Right to Sight: Developing an Action Plan Version 2 CDROM.
C 9,p- World Health Organization and International Agency
ZV_Z)< for the Prevention of Blindness, 2004. Available from: http://
][6$$Lz www.who.int/ncd/vision2020_actionplan/contents/4.1.htm 7Z"mVh} 13. WHO. Informal Consultation on Analysis of Blindness Prevention Outcomes.
4fZ$&)0& WHO/PBL/98.68. Geneva: World Health Organization,
IX^k<Jqr 1998.
EH] 5ZZ[Z 14. Brian G, Ramke J, Szetu J et al. Towards standards of outcome
n\.K:t[
: quality: a protocol for the surgical treatment of cataract in
$[[6N0}*: developing countries. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2006; 34: 383–
OtF{=7 7.
\y:
0+s/ 15. Yorston D, Gichuhi S, Wood M et al. Does prospective monitoring
0;3;Rs improve cataract surgery outcomes in Africa? Br J Ophthalmol
_ts0@Z_: 2002; 86: 543–7.
RoLUPy9U 16. Limburg H. Monitoring cataract surgical outcomes: methods
<{YP=WYW and tools. Community Eye Health J 2002; 15: 51–3.