ABSTRACT
&gY;`*< Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes
j:3A;r\ of cataract surgery and the factors related to
.q
AQPL unoperated cataract in Australia.
>l7eoj Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual
43UJ#r
F Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than
6^7)GCq [ 5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination
Y9z:xE sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography
6|B a were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who
g_3rEvf"4 had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater
f]@[4<N y than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or
O^QR;<t' posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2.
=Bcux8wA#6 Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne
#o(?g-3 residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473
{|8:U}<#h rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria
X=S}WKu was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract
}w|=c>'_} surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had
&F@tmM~ had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49
KD[)O7hYC (20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber
%8bFQNd intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber
>tE,8 intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated
JC Cx 5 eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or
IdN%f]=/ better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven
zWKrt.Dg (11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate
ss
|6_H = vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery
(_s!,QUe caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9%
Gc3PN of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone
@n~ND). intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an
ul5:: opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision
.q'FSEkMJ impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no
K2vPj| particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural
dxae2 tV residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance
Z;dwn~Tw status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated
|?pYJkrYO cataract.
5BGv^Qb_2 Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is
/ab K/8ZQ
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced
&`\kb2uep in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of
e-T9HM&%P cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes
r(/P||`l achieving driving vision following cataract extraction.
pqNoL*
H Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health
B=nx8s services accessibility, prevalence
(t]R#2{ INTRODUCTION
u0$5Fd&X Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in
a7 '\*
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all
0 ^-b} ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate
"p_[A of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be
6b1 Uj< expected from the growth in the elderly population.1
R}=]UOqH- Although there have been a number of studies reporting
E rRMiT the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is
0$dY;,Q . little information about determinants of cataract surgery in
&<;nl^ the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists
5tbiNm^X showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather
LnACce
?b than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral
F\$}8,9 for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has
D\i8rqU/l shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for
,'@ISCK^ cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has
DW;.R<
8 been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10
%>QSeX To appropriately plan health care services, information is
?(XX needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the
JO;`Kz_$ community as well as the factors associated with cataract
Y{\2wU!Isn surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence
jl|X$w of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors
P24 related to unoperated cataract in the community and to
l'X?S(fiV describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery.
L?pvz} METHODS
[_z2z6
Study population
?_`P;}4# Details about the study methodology for the Visual
vmQ
DcCw Impairment Project have been published previously.11
_O'rZ5}& Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to
pl? J<48 recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate.
D_`)T;<Sp Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of
@ F"ShT0 census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen
"gVH;<&] nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites
U8 @*I>vA were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents.
5nlyb,"^g Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82
+=F);;! Original Article
E~U|v'GCd Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia
Ib<+m%Ac Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD
E;*TRr>< Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
F;l<>|vG n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne,
,}$x'8v Victoria 3002, Australia. Email:
cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au Q14;G<l- 78 McCarty et al.
;C@^wI Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural
0hr)tYW,G Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural
"h|0]y^2 residents. A household census was conducted to identify
|Szr=[ eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a
|0Ug~jKU resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of
L
r]Hvd the household census, basic information about age, sex,
WUQh[A41 country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of
@g` ,'r corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected.
QRix_2+ Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local
X "r$,~ examination site for a more detailed interview and examination.
x"=q+sA The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian
<JuJ`t Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee.
YuuG:Kk Assessment of cataract
W-B[_ A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after
DFH6.0UW pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine
WM7/|.HQ hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the
ooxzM ` time of the examination and subsequently from photos using
_P
m}]Y:_ the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and
pIjVJ9+j posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on
0(6`dr_ retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16)
-C
]a2 of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis,
b,sc cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity,
-w0>4JDs PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than
I=-;*3g6 1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to
(KU@hp-\ or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual
|a\TUzq acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical,
a
VMFjkW nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1.
&1Iy9&y Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to
eF\C?4 intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the
U /Fomu analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight
qa?y lR"kA cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the
"xI[4~'`: analyses.
e@By@r&nql A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp.,
G-<~I#k Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in
{HDlv[O%
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations.
Puh&F< B Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman
K@hUif|([ Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph
K@lV P!z the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were
\]El%j4 photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera
g&wQ^ (Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400
RMXj)~4. film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately
Y6a|\
K| by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated
kRPg^Fw"Vw by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies
}lVUa{ubf between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were
g7-K62bb resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing,
:P~Owz the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph
;;5i'h~?]J grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical
A\Gw+l<h, cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%)
N%+M+zEJ for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to
R#M).2:: the severity of the opacity in the worse eye.
WTx;,TNG Assessment of risk factors
r.5F^ A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information
rg\w!L( about education, employment and ethnic background.11
,d#4Ib Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration
%s>E@[s and treatment of a number of medical conditions,
+L6d
$+ including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension
TF>F7v(,45 and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and
U^D7T|P$V duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were
;nE}%lT collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to
}: e9\r) determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants
3Daq5(fLP and use of vitamin supplements.
>B0S5:S$W Data management and statistical analysis
2 6A#X Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a
"5Mo%cUp questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation,
yyc&'J Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or
=[kv@p on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at
G`jhzG a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms
^_uzr}LE` were entered into a computer with double data entry and
]CjODa reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency
#~b9H05D checks were performed on the entire data set.
l}x{.q7Ul SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was
kVY@q&p employed for statistical analyses.
0W)_5f& Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific
N@}U ;x} rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to
/.r($Sg^ account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five
9p XFC9 per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates
i!NGX were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific
L@wnzt data were weighted according to the 1996
!s$fqn
6 Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the
T(6S~;,Z cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population.
Nn$$yUkMX Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared
f]Vz !hM~ tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated
_R]h]<TQ cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted
;.Kzc3yz} into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the
NoMC*",b> Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract.
,#crtX final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically
9} vWTt0 significant. Design effect was assessed through the use
]n{2cPx5d of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The
, Le_PJY) design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment
L@/+u+j0 made in the variance by adding the variance associated with
!`SR$dnE the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence
X@arUs
7 limits.
eu#| | RESULTS
T/H*Bo*=5 Study population
\1tce`+ A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403
:7R\"@V4 (90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%)
? f%@8%px rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did
bc+'n not differ from participants.16 The study population was
lB-Njr representative of the Victorian population and Australia as
L9x,G! a whole.
*@O;IiSE The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to
zRe0z2 98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The
7|{QAv Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to
C}M0KDF 101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural
=14p Ee residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60)
77)C`]0( and 701 (47.5%) were men.
$Q?UyEi Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery
Q 5Ln'La$ As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases
F.JE$)B2EX dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any
_Wgg=A"G cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9).
tf>?; Although the rates varied somewhat between the three
C<{k[!N%zm strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence
P*\.dAi limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes
Zu5`-[mw with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5%
IuRKj8J)o (65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract
6}[W%S]8 (97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract
'GAjx{gM surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall
[^aow-4z weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was
~UXW 3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2).
c\n\gQ:LQ Risk factors for unoperated cataract
e5MX5 T
^ Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified
Zpg$:Rr as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated
y6;A4p> cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents
%|4Nmf$:Og as information about risk factor exposure was not
{]`O $S available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed
NCBS=L: in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence
@ 3FTf"#Y (urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic
7n
{uxE#U) integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a
$:SHZe measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use
tZwZZ0]Z of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private
LC/6'4}_ health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use,
0zetOlFbO glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status.
_z~|*7@ In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the
~`(#sjr6KR level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having
cV=h8F
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract
an
=8['X surgery were not available.
K'Wg_ihA The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate
g&) XaF[! analyses were related to: whether a participant had
W/L~&.' ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been
D!+d]A[r diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment
;i@,TU status (currently employed) and age. These significant
ZXh6Se4o factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression
p~6/ model. The factors that remained significantly related
t32
FNg to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever
Gk
g)\ 3 seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been
|gg6|,Bt4 diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors
HM/2/
/ were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate
1Ue)&RW model.
}4b
4<Sm_h The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract
Q$^oIFb who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with
b*&AIiT Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79
6 GqR]KD Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort
"N>~] Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total
3copJS (years) (%) (%) (%)
f~
kz=R= 40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08)
la+RK Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10)
Au~l
O 50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15)
ammlUWl Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24)
N@6+DHt 60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0)
@)k/t>r( Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7)
Is57)(^.- 70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1)
0vR
gmn Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9)
"sh*,K5x| 80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3)
imw,Nb Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8)
HueGARS 90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0)
n<q1itjD Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0)
b?i5C4=K Age-standardized
+)$oy] (95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0)
F/
p/&9 aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2
BPO)<bx_ their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27%
lEAf\T7 (26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared,
P! cfe@;<4 1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62).
KEfN!6 Outcomes of cataract surgery
=)b!M^=X-a Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior
Q rBb!.r cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were
<8)cr0~zy> left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular
At<D36,^" lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular
^k J>4 lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact
&ci;0P#Q posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of
G]v BI= eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected
]C'^&:&< visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43%
&c[ISc>N{ of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes
7m$EZTw? (11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21,
)WNw0cV}J> P = 0.027).
1R.|j_HYy The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity
LA]UIM@ of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without
^V}c8 P| cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract
pJdR`A-k| and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared,
gCV+amP 2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the
N
T>[
2< operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18
kk>z,A4
h_ (moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this
k*4!rWr0r& moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four
z[Ah9tM% (15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these
8|L;y[v four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction
"l 8YD&q and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one
"IHFme@^ had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract
}Y"vUl_I2 surgery.
Hp>_:2O8s DISCUSSION
}U'VVPh_ To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically
hnimd~E52k assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract
4L bll%[9 surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes
od)ssL&E~ of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual
F'-,Ksn Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and
704_ehrlE high response rate have ensured that the study population is
.?`8B9w representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore,
:6:,s#av these data can be used to plan age-related cataract
Wj
BH2 v services throughout Australia.
G0A\"2U We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age
Jcy+(7lE) of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is
m3~_uc/+D significantly less than was reported in a number of previous
}_BNi;H studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye
2bOl`{x Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract
z=TOGP( between studies because of different methodologies and
"ql$Rz8 cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well
BRa9j:_b as the different age structures of the study populations.
S5kD|kJ Other studies have used less conservative definitions of
8|(],NyEJ cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined.
:p%#U$S4 In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity
W^7yh&@lU has not been included in the definition of cataract.
-
~4na{6x Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the
~{$c| actual need for cataract surgery in the community.
t,n2N13 80 McCarty et al.
{V pk o Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort
/M JI^\CA Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total
MsZx 0] (years) (%) (%) (%)
S.{
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81)
lMH~J8U3 Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (
} '?qUy3x 50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17)
V;W{pd-I Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00)
<5^m`F5 60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19)
E[7E%^:Mg Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26)
( et W4p 70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1)
mP=[h
|a$r Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46)
V1,/qd_ 80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4)
& Zn`2% Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3)
g?xD*3< 90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5)
{F2Rv Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8)
&AOGg\ Age-standardized
,Tu.cg (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)
#0vda'q=j Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract
E#_2t)20 surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected.
4'=Q:o*w` Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81
6^t#sEf
f] The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the
O_7}H) Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude
$,J0) ~ rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the
N$=9R crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%).
j7MUA#6$ However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains
H la?\ Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban
7
Mq{Py1 Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than
mI!iSVqr the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%,
l^}u S|c( 95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in
!yPy@eP~ Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due,
l"(PP3 perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens
Sir1>YEm implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio.
n@ SUu7o The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable
W4&
8 Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization,
;Z"MO@9: states that cataract surgical services should be provided that
-3m
IdZ ‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and
7Y[ q)
lv improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is
3vcyes-U not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted
P7b"(G% in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement
m3Wc};yE*Q in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We
$*G3'G2'iS found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction
/KWdI
P# had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have
<uv`)Q 9 shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this
1t^y?<)
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their
\t1#5 current vision than participants without cataract or participants
G-2~$ u with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the
XWAIW=. United States, researchers found that the change in patients’
m!G(vhA,_w ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their
v5L+B`~ vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to
G gA:;f46 their change in visual functioning score than to their change
8tR6.09' in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function
rhQ+ylt8I has been shown to be associated with improvement in
PvV\b<Pe+ overall quality of life.22
QxLrpM"O A recent review found that the incidence of visually
9)]`l
e significant posterior capsule opacification following
Mn/ cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36%
S+[,\>pY capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated
[dP<A?s with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear
O4f9n capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an
r+[g.` opaque capsule.
iUh7eR9 A number of studies have shown that the demand and
y'8T=PqY[t timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity,
-u%o) ;B degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We
Z"Hq{?l9 have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more
p+b9D likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is
E
JC}"%h employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7
DL~!
^fx In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any
W%ix|R^2] particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of
Q$.CtECo having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care
$aTo9{M ^ in Australia may explain the fact that people without
4%nK0FAj Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the
hOLlZP+ USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated
: ciwh with unoperated cataract in Australia.
iWW!'u$+I` In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem
Lp$&eROFVs in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract
md{1Jn" surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will
ABtv|0K increase further with the ageing of the population: the
<3k9 y^0 number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in
SV2\vby}C the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well
MGKSaP;x accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes
{
zalB" i of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good.
x*^)B~7} These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract
$*0XWrE surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for
?y*
yl cataract extractions increases.
U3>ES"N ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
8`b_,(\ N The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants
`@ Ont+ from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the
~m7?:(/lb National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell
a,*|*Cv Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and
l(tMo7iPa the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient
5@Xy) z of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal
l)
)Cvre+ Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital.
g>f_'7F& REFERENCES
M059"X=" 1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94.
+u7nx Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17.
DVyxe} 2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical,
f'M7x6W and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population
@z.HyQ_v sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18.
a:
OuDjFp 3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens
Nf{tC9l opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated
o{
\r1<D cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6.
L/J)OJe\ 4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related
>9]i#So^ lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study.
L {i|OK^e Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52.
:E9 @9>3S 5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye
z2A1h!
Me study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population
lMBXD?,,J of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18:
olf7L% 363–71.
Jq?"?d|: 6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J.
1{X ;&y Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye
$5/lU
}To Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8.
V2|XcR 7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR.
;v1&Rs Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient
R~DZY{u+/$ lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis.
rYMHc@a9( Sci. 1996; 37: S183.
tO^KCnL 8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated
v=I
'rx variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J.
xT$9M" Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22.
%7~~*_G 9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too
RK`C31Ws many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal
KoNJ;YiKtN of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73:
+8AGs, 77–80.
^/kn#1H
7& 10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice
B@W`AD1^{ style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates?
HsGyNkr?r Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18.
f 6h!wx 11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest
(E*eq-8 CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye
$*`=sV!r disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic
SGREpOlJ+ Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48.
26,!HmtC 12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading
dt(#|8i% of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81.
5@6%/='I q 82 McCarty et al.
}0P5~]S<5A 13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley &
F`$V H^%V Sons, 1977; 249–73.
^$7Lmd.qI 14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume
L"akV,w4p II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International
pk*c
ch# Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61.
Q}N.DM@d3 15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and
w
>:~Ev] Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997.
S&A, Q' 16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison
v:MJF*/ of participants with non-participants in a populationbased
^;b$`*M1 epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment
Sxrbhnx Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82.
]}_@!F) 17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the
o!`.LL%
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health
Lzzf`jN] Organization, 1997.
7T]}<aK<c[ 18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO,
9OeY59
: Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation
e~C^*w L on vision and physical function in elderly patients.
:"9 :J JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6.
36154*q 19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of
N@$g"w Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative
t{\FV@R outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures.
#%4
-zNS Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41.
G 2]/g 20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated
.]+oE$,! with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study.
YN1P9j#0d Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31.
x |
= 21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract
w /$4
Rv+S surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and
6b9 oSY-8 personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5.
6Y^UC2TBs 22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A.
*ip2|2G$ Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to
&n>\ +Q cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions.
=W(mZ#*vdY Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5.
9Xb,Swo~ 23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A
gTE/g'3 systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule
+H5=zf2
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21.
lwEJ)Bv 24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M.
T/DKT1P- Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health
h}&WBN Med. 1994; 16: 393–8.
.4c* _$ 25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in
}D_h*9 indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark,
w]b3,b Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract
:<ye:P1s Surgery Outcomes Study. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1998; 82: 1107–11.