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

Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia

ABSTRACT w8 ?Pb$Fe  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes E fP>O  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to y 2z{rd  
unoperated cataract in Australia. Np.no$_  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual [kPD`be2#  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than Z{Vxr*9oO  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination N@k3$+ls  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography zWy ,Om8P  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who Sp 7u_Pq{  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater ooTc/QEYi  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or ! G*&4V3Mg  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. {I4%   
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne "Z;~Y=hC13  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 Kb^>X{  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria mfZ)^X  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract 6tOCZ 'f  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had <v]z6B@9!  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 #X#8ynt  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber :%N*{uy  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber 8h@q  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated G;/Q>V  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or yB.G=90  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven q7|:^#{av  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate E(_ KN[}S  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery 3S5^ `Ag#  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% >W r$Y{  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone y=w`w >%  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an %MN.O-Lc  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision <|a=hHPi:  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no mwIk^Sz]@  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural JT04 vm4  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance GzdRG^vN  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated oCVku:.  
cataract. 1f Y>>*oP  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is /YFa ;2 W  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced DVh)w}v  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of (0OM "`j  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes lm$;:Roj*  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. Yl~$V(  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health @ 7W?8  
services accessibility, prevalence L^FcS\r;  
INTRODUCTION % 5z gd>  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in ubbnFE &PD  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all : @6mFTV  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate -Sz_mr  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be ((<`zx  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 qTM%G-  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting %;|0  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is g_aCHEFBv  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in bd== +   
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists {C")#m-0  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather sg AzL  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral Y#HI;Y^RP  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has -RMi8{  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for %8r/oS  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has VhEka#  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 M %`\P\A  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is (9C<K<  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the $,27pkwHeW  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract F9flSeN  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence z|N3G E(.@  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors yI3kvh  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to A''pS  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. $`J_:H%  
METHODS Vba.uKNjk  
Study population cg{AMeW  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual  QLKK.]  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 hdma=KqZ(  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to s:>\/[*>0c  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. 5:.{oSy7n  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of y1f:?L-z  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen g(4b Ba9y  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites ,5Vt]#F5@  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. bBc-^  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 ipE ]}0q  
Original Article Zu*K-ep"  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 9pKGr@&   
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD K }$&:nao  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia 4Y\wnwI  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, qQ]]~ F  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au ay )/q5  
78 McCarty et al. c3%@Wj:fo  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural 8jlLUG:g  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural )FN;+"IJ  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify &EGqgNl  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a |OO in]5  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of 5K%SL1N  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, g`^X#-!(  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of !%(h2]MQ  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. zw<p74DH  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local m><w0k?t  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. Rgy- OA  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian 9I7\D8r  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. :AdDLpk3j  
Assessment of cataract ]r! >{  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after k#Of]mXXz  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine {gA\ph% s  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the @$"J|s3M  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using <$w?/y/'  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and <}U'V}g  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on s5.AW8X=?*  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) (BxJryXm  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, Q-Ux<#  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, [ xOzzp4  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than M/?KV9Xk2  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to I KtB;  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual CycUeT  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, '\~$dtI$  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. *#% 9Rp2|  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to _LAS~x7,  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the w{~+EolK  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight [S.ZJUns  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the xvzr:p P  
analyses. JG C=(;  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., +,o0-L1D  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in dC=)^(  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. xD&^j$Em  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman RH}A  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph 2^t#6XBk/  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were ^qCkt1C-M  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera 7iHK_\tn  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 -(`OcGM'L  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately DC1'Kyk  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated ?JV|dM  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies v+jsC`m  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were f84:hXo6  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, ZEYgK)^  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph 9}B`uJ  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical Z/^  u  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) MNH1D! }  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to qQ!1t>j+H  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. j CTAKaq  
Assessment of risk factors d:G]1k;z  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information .^$YfTabq  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 ExHKw~y9  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration + UJuB  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, C"lJl k9g^  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension UpXz&k  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and ~2EHOO {  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were nA?Hxos  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to fw oQ' &  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants vIvVq:6_3  
and use of vitamin supplements. 3:%QB9qc]'  
Data management and statistical analysis EBtLzbj  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a T]Nu)  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, VL[)[~^  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or ,3I^?5  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at s] /tYJYl  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms v){ .Z^_C  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and zo;^m|  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency C@N1ljXJT  
checks were performed on the entire data set.  ]*O/+  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was */ G<!W  
employed for statistical analyses. [<`SfE  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific ( *G\g=D  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to T ^A b!O  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five b'zR 9V  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates Y+/JsOD  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific K!D o8|  
data were weighted according to the 1996 %iJ%{{f`  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the x*oWa,  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. 7z_;t9Y  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared - Xz?s  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated n(~\l#o@  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted Bs`$ i ;&  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the 9Pd* z>s  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. n{*e 9Aw  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically I[o*RKT'"  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use 3+MB5 T  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The 9ykM3  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment wHz?#MW 3L  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with 33:DH}  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence %u?HF4S'  
limits. SEKN|YQV/t  
RESULTS ;??ohA"{5  
Study population lfk9+)  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 G,&%VQ3P>  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) 9T2xU3UyY  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did jm>3bd  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was 5,+\`!g  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as toa-Wa{  
a whole. jigs6#  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to U` R;P-  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The {sN"( H4$  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to q/@dR{-  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural 6DS43 AQs  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) L0Vgo <A  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. jThbeY[  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery <3 @}Lj  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases pD`/_-=^h  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any \4~AI=aw,T  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). u?Hb(xZtg=  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three vgPUIxB@  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence /J%do]PDl  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes VZxTx0: ,  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% XSD%t8<LO  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract f'/ KMe%<  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract cK}Pf+r>  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall xEoip?O?7F  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was ?z.Isvn  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). qe?Ggz3p.  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract c>MY$-PD  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified E2:D(7(;l  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated gRvJ.Q{h  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents N du7nKG  
as information about risk factor exposure was not ,VG9)K 1K  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed {CP o<lz  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence N{pa) /  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic Yk7"XP[Y  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a '5WN,Vy8.  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use wO.B~`y  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private }:^XX0:FK  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, ![Hhxu  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. {{zua- F  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the o}!&y?mp  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having [;F{mN  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract Ltg-w\?]  
surgery were not available. wy\o*P9mG)  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate g5<ZS3tQ  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had | @q9{h7  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been (WkTQRcN,  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment _X?y ,#  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant QS%,7'EG  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression @|]iSD&T #  
model. The factors that remained significantly related B,:23[v  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever \|Y{jG<cu  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been <EOg,"F  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors ew /KZE  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate V3%Krn1'  
model. a\Tr!Be,  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract e ^-3etx  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with K"G(?<>~4c  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 s%hU*^ 8  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort +0SW ?#%  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total /1H9z`qV  
(years) (%) (%) (%) ,d3Q+9/  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) m]Hb+Y=;h  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) J,.j_ii`!  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) \IO$ +Guh  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) Cca~Cq[%*(  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) <=#lRZW[z  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) m*Q[lr=  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) -ryDsq  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) b EoB;]  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) \9[NH/.Z{  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) z" b/osV  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) V[BY/<z)A  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) !N@S^JD6  
Age-standardized Gp?ToS2^d  
(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) JL}hOBqfI  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 4*@G&v?n  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% 12%z3/i  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, 0A #9C09  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). Ba"^K d`  
Outcomes of cataract surgery y^E F<<\  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior INN/VDsJ  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were glOqft&>`  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular J_y<0zF**  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular _rWM]  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact :Ul'(@  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of 2m)kyQ  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected 34+)-\xt:  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% s&_IWala  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes -6em*$k^  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, _Gs  
P = 0.027). T ?<'=  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity eK=m02  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without :) Fp B"  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract x]%4M\T``  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, Fb\2df{@  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the &ESR1$)'P  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 *+,Lc1|\  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this 7Y @=x#  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four &]"_pc/>m  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these ./BP+\)l O  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction *`pec3"  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one $.3CiM }~  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract ''\cBM!  
surgery. hF=V ?\  
DISCUSSION GD6'R"tJ  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically |"tV["a  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract IpaJ<~ p  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes $nD k mKl  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual K~hlwjrt  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and CsST-qxg  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is Dk{nOvZu<  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, abk:_  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract C7*Yg$`{  
services throughout Australia. u!EulAl  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age [#@p{[?r  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is xzf )_ <  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous C` 1\$U~%  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye Rx"VscB6z  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract NNpa69U  
between studies because of different methodologies and T. Y4L  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well eEds-&_  
as the different age structures of the study populations. "e};?|y  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of V9 t:JY  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. %KVRiX  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity nv|y@! (  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. W;x LuKIG  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the )UU6\2^  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. KqIe8bi^G  
80 McCarty et al. 5TW<1'u  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort :QY9pT  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total   k`zK  
(years) (%) (%) (%) K E1@z]  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) T//+&Sk[  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( )uJ`E8>-  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) x-k /rZ  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) F>{uB!!L4  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) Gi_X+os  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) k 5<0M'  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) :EAfD(D{)  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) #3jZ7RqzQ  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) KUV{]?'  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) (.t:sn"P  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) : .eS|  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) bJ[1'Es `  
Age-standardized {_D'\i(Y_  
(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) $9b6,Y_-  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract k.hSN8  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. z>q_]U0  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 4}b:..Ku  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the !S<~(Ujyw  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude Kn]WXc|("  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the \p|!=H@  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). N($]))~3&  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains =1uI >[aN  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban &}?e:PEy  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than r#}%s of  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, smNr%}_g  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in {hR23eE)#  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, W6>uLMUa  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens [J#(k`@  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. S^.=j oI  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable djp(s$:{4  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, woKdI)f $  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that mUw,q;{  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and .:/@<V+K  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is HB^azHr  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted 03y<'n  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement }#M|3h;q9+  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We Z5K,y19/~  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction GKr L  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have 3i1>EjML  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this #e[5O| V~  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their {s]eXc]K}  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants i|e-N?l  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the t!LvV.g+  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ &M0v/!%L  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their ~}fpe>M:  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to ,==lgM2V>  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change 9b>a<Z  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function ZZUCwczI  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in *!r8HV/<  
overall quality of life.22 O\?ei+(H7  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually Y|",.~  
significant posterior capsule opacification following :hr%iu  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% H3JWf MlW  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated pLRHwL.  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear q ?wB h^  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an $%/Zm*H  
opaque capsule. &A>J>b  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and C]}0h!_V  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, *<KY^;  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We *%8dW  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more 6d,"GT  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is -k'=s{iy  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 o9JJ_-O"  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any r]TeR$NJ  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of | r2'B  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care wEk9(|  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without OA[w|Tt  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the )V3G~p=0  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated bBGLf)fsTG  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. P'zA=Rd&~>  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem PE-Vx RN)  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract ^dRB(E}|)  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will .a?GC(  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the k]w;(<  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in whr[rWt@>  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well 4; y*y tY*  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes IOomBy:  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. s@V4ny9x  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract Zg_ fec~6q  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for &i $p5  
cataract extractions increases. vjmNS=l  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS f }P6P>0T  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants V9bn  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the 7a\at)q/y  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell Ia %> c  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and ?)X 0l  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient n|q $=jE  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal  h&}z@  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. c'O"</  
REFERENCES | $   
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. rU/8R'S  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. S+2we  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, 7!F<Uf,V3  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population \ ]v>#VXr_  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. o4P>t2'  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens zpgRK4p,I"  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated [$]qJ~kz  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. pmfL}Dn  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related H'a6] ]2  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. "* 8>` 6E  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. jEMnre3/  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye \$ +#7( K  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population aO &!Y\=@  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: <H,E1kGw9  
363–71. <I 0EjV  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. >zX`qv&>  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye d~qZ;uw  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. y?'Z'  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. c8h71Cr  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient dnzZ\t>U  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. vyBx| TR  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. ^XT;n  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated ST1;i5   
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. 7*eIs2aY  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. 8a;;MJ)  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too 0ZJrK\K;  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal 9~v#]Q}Z}4  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: zP>=K  
77–80. a;f A0_  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice 9w <k1j  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? g$U7bCHG  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. 7I0K= 'D7  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest IAd[_<9D  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye ]t-B-(D  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic }LwKi-G?  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. es1'z.UJ  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading ^ux"<?  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. P G*FIRDb  
82 McCarty et al. ]4[^S.T=  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & .~%,eF;l$  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. xHaoSs*C9  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume $ItPUYi";  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International -O6\!Wo=-  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. VMW<?V 2Z  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and Dl_SEf6b  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. QW>(LGG=  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison EakS(Q?  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased l 5z8]/  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment l]mn 4cn3  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. 3L%g2`  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the fc9gi4y9  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health -0:B2B  
Organization, 1997. Ge4 tc  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, q pFzK  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation }NETiJ"6  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. ]@7]mu:oL  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. !FR1yO'd>  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of ! jb{q bq  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative 9{5 c}bX  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. ^9I^A!w=  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. &-6 D'@  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated m 1lfC  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. 9=Rj9%  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. AAt<{  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract G0eJ<*|_ 3  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and q7% eLJ  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. T4{&@b 0*  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. JSQ*8wDcl  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to !j.jvI%e;  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. weiqt *,8  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. {1 94u %'  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A ')w*c  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule \$h LhYz-  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. -W+67@(\8H  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. (UV+/[,  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health . SdEhW15)  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. xW,(d5RtZ  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in [@= [< _r  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, sy` : wp  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract MNi u5-g5  
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