ABSTRACT
q,GL#L Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes
H;6V of cataract surgery and the factors related to
|*b8-a8< unoperated cataract in Australia.
fCKcv | Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual
?S_S.Bd Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than
GCoqKE
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination
= U5)m sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography
8HzEH-J
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who
C9h8d had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater
o|+tRl than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or
i[<O@Rb posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2.
}IV7dKzl Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne
C}!|K0t? residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473
NS1[-ng rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria
loZfzN&6A was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract
dL"v*3Fy surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had
lBCM;#P had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49
. "R
2^` (20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber
n8?gZ` W intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber
lY~xoHT;[ intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated
I{E10; eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or
'K0Y@y better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven
6)TFb, (11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate
03,+uf vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery
DzYno-]A] caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9%
)wKuumet of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone
4Ld0AApncy intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an
+%FGti$[ opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision
MOj 0"x) impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no
HMBxj($eR particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural
iKDGYM residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance
f$P pFSY
4 status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated
t.]oLG22r cataract.
MJK L4 G Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is
Xh){W~- quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced
[/#;u*n in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of
)'nGuL-w!i cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes
\5J/? achieving driving vision following cataract extraction.
5 J 0 Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health
iX~V(~v services accessibility, prevalence
C#(4>' INTRODUCTION
RM,r0Kv17Y Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in
#Jg)HU9
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all
]_j{b)t ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate
kIM*
K%L} of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be
J}lBKP:-* expected from the growth in the elderly population.1
l9# v r Although there have been a number of studies reporting
}F**!%4d the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is
p ^T0(\1 little information about determinants of cataract surgery in
K6_{AuL}4 the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists
a+IU<O-J? showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather
@ScH"I];uA than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral
F
b
VtyQz for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has
]Z2;sA shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for
79=w]y cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has
(Z;-u+ }. been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10
C4]vq+ To appropriately plan health care services, information is
jv?`9{- needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the
C]p3,G,oN community as well as the factors associated with cataract
5L%A5C&| surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence
CFkM}`v0 of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors
N)WAzH related to unoperated cataract in the community and to
e@F9'z4 describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery.
M9[Fx=
qY METHODS
6$lj$8\ Study population
S1.w^Ccy Details about the study methodology for the Visual
cF7I Impairment Project have been published previously.11
M8oI8\6[ Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to
4#{i recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate.
8A~5@ Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of
3.Oc8(N^} census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen
=X'i^
Q nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites
_=Ed>2M)no were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents.
gBA
UrY%] Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82
u[$ \
az7 Original Article
Xt %;]1n Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia
'8R5?9" Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD
.H
{ Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
F:"<4hiA" n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne,
03Pa; n Victoria 3002, Australia. Email:
cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au 6Lk<VpAa 78 McCarty et al.
g!;k$`@{E' Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural
1bs8fUPB3 Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural
?kEcYD residents. A household census was conducted to identify
$R4[TQY).! eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a
0vbiq resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of
P{v>o,a. the household census, basic information about age, sex,
f|G,pDLx country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of
~?TGSD@( corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected.
chv0\k"' Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local
`oQ)qa_ examination site for a more detailed interview and examination.
SA@MJ>Z The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian
4X,fb` Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee.
wN1%;~?7 Assessment of cataract
0?59o!@h A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after
a-w=Lp
VM pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine
mNS7/I\ hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the
]4f;%pE time of the examination and subsequently from photos using
ue8C pn^M the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and
vpR^G`/ posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on
#Ezq}F8Y retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16)
$U=E7JO of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis,
,'[&" Eg cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity,
bH+x `]{A PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than
g=w,*68vuy 1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to
h'Tn&2r6 or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual
0uX"KL]Elf acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical,
&6!~Q,;K- nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1.
-"J6|Y#8 Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to
,nn5LQ|l.j intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the
!<9sOvka{ analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight
+Kc1a; cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the
}6/L5j:+ analyses.
dD6I @N)X A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp.,
=gI;%M\' Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in
Q`$Q(/ height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations.
_?UW,5=O Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman
kOfq6[JC Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph
/8!s
C D the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were
4%l
@ photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera
s|3
@\9\ (Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400
.Z=4,m> film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately
iUuG}rqj by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated
>z0~!!YZ by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies
i!zh9,i>M between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were
T';<;6J** resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing,
}gw
`,i the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph
_=0;5OrK1X grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical
W#cr9"'Ta cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%)
zGz^T for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to
Sz0M8fYT] the severity of the opacity in the worse eye.
uA;3R\6? Assessment of risk factors
'BT}'qN A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information
OHnHSb'?\ about education, employment and ethnic background.11
DbSl}N ; Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration
_] E ~ci} and treatment of a number of medical conditions,
e_J_rx including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension
:" ZH and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and
@+",f] duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were
STgl{# collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to
b5YjhRimS determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants
?uUK9
*N and use of vitamin supplements.
b?-%Uzp< Data management and statistical analysis
J'.:l} g!1 Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a
puS'9Lpp questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation,
^DHFP-G?e Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or
IS7g{:}=p on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at
YZ\$b=- a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms
Ns9cx were entered into a computer with double data entry and
a
PB %6c= reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency
0TSj]{[ checks were performed on the entire data set.
+3vK=d_Va SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was
=HP_IG_ employed for statistical analyses.
'#t"^E2$ Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific
O:q}<ljp rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to
[8Ub#<]] account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five
OM]p"Jd per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates
{i^ ?XdM were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific
Y,WcHE data were weighted according to the 1996
*P:`{ZV7=W Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the
.)})8csl.d cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population.
s;}';# Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared
dz5bW> tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated
B/E1nBobC cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted
Qo?"hgjlqm into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the
F#4?@W Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract.
o'myo
.k{ final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically
FlVGi3 significant. Design effect was assessed through the use
,0<|&D of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The
Podm 3b design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment
$g#X9/+< made in the variance by adding the variance associated with
OD>-^W t;% the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence
sXoBw.^Ir_ limits.
Gpe h#Q4x RESULTS
P;hjr;
Study population
F1Egcx/$V A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403
c)@M7UK[ (90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%)
L=Dx$#| rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did
w^R5/#F_r not differ from participants.16 The study population was
An]*J|nFIY representative of the Victorian population and Australia as
'O\K Wj{ a whole.
k qwS
/s The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to
`mCcD 98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The
F;q I^{m2 Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to
|C>Yd*E,C 101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural
9Eg'=YJ residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60)
dhm; and 701 (47.5%) were men.
& rw|fF|] Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery
<PV @JJ" As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases
gN mp'Lm dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any
'Iu$4xo`[ cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9).
#exE~@fy- Although the rates varied somewhat between the three
(x.K%
QC) strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence
Atfon&^
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes
v`Sllv5bV with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5%
gvy%`SSW (65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract
~=
0zZTG (97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract
N{Is
2Ia surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall
{Ja#pt weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was
_Dk;U*2 3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2).
M}%0=VCY7 Risk factors for unoperated cataract
YJ!6)d?C. Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified
vZXyc* as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated
39m# cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents
PeE'#&wn as information about risk factor exposure was not
yiI&>J)) available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed
:5CwRg in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence
Sf*VkH (urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic
%A W integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a
O[`n{Vl/ measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use
NTVG'3o of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private
'-ACNg
Nn health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use,
L'['7 glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status.
yil{RfBEr_ In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the
.GS|H d level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having
Em
_miU cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract
_G'. VSGH surgery were not available.
dd$\Q The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate
|t.WPp5, analyses were related to: whether a participant had
B`KpaE] ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been
AY * diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment
6NZf!7,B status (currently employed) and age. These significant
[!aHP?- factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression
s'5
jvlG model. The factors that remained significantly related
:!aFfb[" to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever
%0"o(y+zt seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been
5Pv>`E2^ diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors
{~d4;ht1Y were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate
zM)o^Fn2 model.
!X#=Pt[, The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract
cvc.-7IO who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with
q 2=^l Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79
Lqz}h-Ei Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort
f#5mX&j Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total
^
*m;![$[ (years) (%) (%) (%)
w+ _'BU1# 40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08)
r)*KgGsk Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10)
N!btj,vx 50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15)
;1F3.ibE Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24)
!5p01]7 60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0)
mT\] Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7)
KqB(W,$ 70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1)
od-N7lp# Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9)
[j:%O|h 80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3)
qzV:N8+,` Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8)
VIynlvy 90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0)
|-Y,:sY: Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0)
x/5%a{~j2 Age-standardized
@XB/9! (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)
{wCQ#V aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2
=y^N'1q their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27%
Tpkm\_ (26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared,
T2^@x9 1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62).
g6r3V.X
' Outcomes of cataract surgery
S,qsCn
z Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior
}&EPH}V2n cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were
keCM}V`?" left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular
N(&,+KJ) lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular
>L5[dkg% lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact
|Y2u=B posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of
'}]w=2Lf eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected
t"JfqD E visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43%
`3\5&B