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 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 +%FG ti$[  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision MOj 0"x)  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no HMBxj($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}lBK P:-*  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 l9#vr  
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 1bs 8fUPB3  
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,pDL x  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of ~?TG SD@(  
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 ue8Cpn^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) $U=E7JO  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, ,'[&" Eg  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, bH+x `]{A  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than g=w,*68vuy  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to h'Tn&2r6  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual 0uX"KL]Elf  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, &6!~Q,;K-  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. -"J6 |Y#8  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to ,nn5LQ|l.j  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the !<9sOvka{  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight +Kc1a;  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the }6/L5j:+  
analyses. d D6I @N)X  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., =gI;%M\'  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in Q `$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%) zG z^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 N s9cx  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and a PB %6c=  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency 0 TSj]{[  
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$4xo`[  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). #exE ~@fy-  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three (x.K% QC)  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence Atfon&^  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes v`Sllv5bV  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% gvy%`SSW  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract ~= 0zZTG  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract N{Is 2Ia  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall { Ja#pt  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was _Dk;U*2  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). M}%0=VCY7  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract YJ!6)d?C.  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified vZXyc *  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated 39m#  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents PeE'#&w n  
as information about risk factor exposure was not yiI&>J))  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed :5CwRg  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence Sf*VkH  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic %AW  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a O[`n{Vl/  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use NTVG'3o  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private '-ACNg Nn  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, L'[ '7  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. yil{RfBEr_  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the .GS|H d  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having Em _miU  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract _G'. VSGH  
surgery were not available. dd$\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 6NZ f!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) !5p 01]7  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) m T\]  
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). g6 r3V.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&Bf  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes !V#(g./W  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, aJK8G,Vk  
P = 0.027). ]KLj Qpd  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity 2["bS++?  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without !fZ{ =  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract UC\CCDV#^  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, Q4}2-}|  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the " :@5|4qK  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 DXsp 2  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this 2LEf"FH0~  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four rp{q.fy'U  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these QI.{M$,m~  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction +MvcW.W~  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one oZQ% P  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract T:q!>"5  
surgery. QcU&G*   
DISCUSSION )!s f@F?  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically 2I3MV:5  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract BGh1hyJ8d  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes h8i ic  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual 3MPmLV#f  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and Zi<Y?Vm/,O  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is j *B,b4  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, FZf{kWH  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract o/I'Qi$v-  
services throughout Australia. Cak `}J 2  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age C^oj/} ^  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is R~TzZ(Ah]  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous rWsUWA T*  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye wl2P^Pj  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract .nh }f}j  
between studies because of different methodologies and xDJ@MW#  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well E "9`  
as the different age structures of the study populations. K{DsGf ,  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of >(T)9fKF  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. 9vX~gh{]~  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity PiQs Vk  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. R"Ff(1m  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the ECW=865jL  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. L[s7q0 F`l  
80 McCarty et al. k4i*80  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort t,P_&0X  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total gPT<%F  
(years) (%) (%) (%) (D5sJ$&E@\  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) UA0 j#  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( ^osXM`  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) i$?$X,  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) uCB>".'kM  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) R"2wop  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) ko-,l6E  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1)  B=d :r  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) q}xYme4  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) 3bN]2\   
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) Y W9+.Dc`  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) Mil+> X0  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) ]I ^b&N  
Age-standardized iwVsq_[]L  
(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) B B9+d"Sq  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract QWQJSz5  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. 7cQFH@SC  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 UTS.o#d  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the ,j!%,!n o  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude xO_u  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the AW <"3 !@  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). E' _6v  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains {A`J0ol<B9  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban ]tx/t^&/\u  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than $n= w  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, K6EG"Vv !  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in Ly P Cc|  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, ~ ?JN I8  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens S;K5JBX0#  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. SVn $!t  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable 1k0*WCfZ  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, x8!uI)#tS  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that Y(&rlL(sPK  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and F*-+5nJ&@  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is ,4HZ-|EOZ  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted N c(f+8  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement RxE.t[  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We l T#WM]  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction 3Z}v%=5 "  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have m.68ctaa  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this ]E $bK  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their FQ>y2n=<d  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants zF@[S  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the 4\E1M[6  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ to;^'#B  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their O%f{\F r  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to !l5@L\   
their change in visual functioning score than to their change lnGg1/  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function E/<n"'0ek  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in \dbaY:(  
overall quality of life.22 R*?!xDJ  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually "E@A~<RKP  
significant posterior capsule opacification following yeam-8  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% mV0u:ws  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated D&x.io  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear MDZPp;\)  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an NiMsAI@j  
opaque capsule. :`>tCYy;  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and 4+89 M  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, 0+k..l  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We =b8u8*ua  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more KAi_+/]K_  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is `dWnu3r;  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 BC5R$W. e  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any v4K! BW  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of $KhD>4^ jL  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care G.$KP  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without o+L [o_er  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the "3'a.b akw  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated 0+[3>Ny 0  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. "Pu917_P  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem ?2R!n" m-d  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract A-d<[@d0  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will w n|;Li  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the BS?i!Bm7  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in Y; iI =U  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well CEBu[TT/9  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes 0!RP7Sx  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. bSn={O"M  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract yMzy!b Ky  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for 1]Cb i7  
cataract extractions increases. a8v\H8@X  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS h~qv_)F_  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants I2pE}6q  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the p!)PbSw#  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell :4x6dYNU  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and mM2I  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient Mn3j6a  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal #T8jHnI  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. L_|iQwU%  
REFERENCES I[gPW7&S@  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. -e?n4YO*\  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. lqgR4  !  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, \TnK<83  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population PMX'vA`  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. keKsLrd  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens }6 u)wF5  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated W5()A,R  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. {zc*yV\  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related ftRdK>a D  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. L_+ Fin  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. 4PR&67|AH_  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye #N'9F&:V$  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population NXz/1ut%  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: D5xTuv9T  
363–71. @Jlsx0i}}  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. E0aFHC[  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye _{}^]ZB  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. U[q39FR  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. _`laP5~  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient vfVF^ WOd  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. VG$%Vs  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. $bBUL C  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated LJ9#!r@H  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. ~H[_=  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. N ;n55N  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too ; qUd]c9oi  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal 3.=o}!  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: n n">   
77–80. *Ct ^jU7  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice D6\k}4n-  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? =~dX P  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. | +<o(Q(  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest ]*{tno  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye 6HpiG`  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic fCv.$5   
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. :<1PCX2  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading 1nE`Wmo.2  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. K#y CZ2  
82 McCarty et al. yoBR'$-=  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & >kDkvg1"  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. cNl$ vP83z  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume 88 DMD"$B  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International "?"+1S  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. 4zqO!nk  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and g'.(te |  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. =UZQ` {  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison }>'1Qg  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased $#J  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment cN]g^  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. {6;S= 9E\  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the OH`|aqN  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health |6Qn/N$+f  
Organization, 1997. Q^oB`)k  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, F{ sPQf'  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation OUtMel_  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. T^ RYN  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. ,V ) |A=ml  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of Y i`wj^  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative `SG8w_  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. ,h* 'Cs04h  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. lQf38u||  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated 8'0I$Qa4  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. n]v,cfn/=<  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. 78F Ly7  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract W=!di3IA  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and !)LVZfQ0  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. ?m:,hI  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. 7uxUqM  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to 'qiDh[ATa  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. Ks\\2$Cm7  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. -=a,FDeR  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A >4]y)df5  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule ,w$:=;i  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. th`pf   
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. @agxu-Y  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health (Kb_/  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. }C<$q  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in USJk *  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, c^x5 E`{  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract W|AK"vf  
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:
2+6=? 正确答案:8
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交