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 /5u<78GW1  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes ? #fu.YE\  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to 2nR[Xh?L  
unoperated cataract in Australia. 2 AMo:Jqv  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual = >_\fNy  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than #3gp6*R  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination [Al&  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography k7T`bYv  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who y!_C/!d  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater sVOyT*GY  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or R=QZgpR  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. c9&xe"v  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne ]?!mS[X  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 TA4!$7b$  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria ~5}* d  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract L6|oyf  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had ,,q10iF  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 ~kEI4}O  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber y.< m#Zzt  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber RO'7\xvn  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated V<T9&8l+:  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or ! t?iXZ  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven 8|l\E VV6  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate JehrDC2N  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery $#9;)8J  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% GLeK'0Q@  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone {# ?N  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an LnH?dy  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision C26>BU<  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no &m)6J'q3k  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural ,9zjFI  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance i:Y^{\Z?V  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated QI'Oz{vE  
cataract. [+n*~  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is aBNc(?ri  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced Q ayPo]O  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of _E@2ZnD2  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes C zs8!S  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. Yg%I?  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health r*2+xDoEi  
services accessibility, prevalence x[ ~b2o  
INTRODUCTION saBVgSd  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in 4i)1'{e  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all C~,a! qY  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate y" RF;KW>  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be zy/ @ WFPE  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 i [7\[  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting le|~BG hL  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is o=1Uh,S3R  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in 4gI/!,J(b  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists e$<0 7Oc  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather %9KldcQ}~  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral Ns >- o  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has D=j-!{zB  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for S 6@u@C  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has i1ixi\P{0  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 'N (:@]4N  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is 4[m`#  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the Y2N>HK0  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract I667Gz$j5  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence T"{>t  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors Yg]-wQrH  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to ky R:[+je  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. g1/:Q%R,  
METHODS >c1q pk/  
Study population [_R~%Yh+'E  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual %<\vGqsM  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 8g@<d ^8@  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to b z`+k,*  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. dU&a{ $ku[  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of [owWiN4`s  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen py$Q  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites pNG:0  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. 'F+C4QAq  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 Go5J%&E9  
Original Article ;v}GJ<3  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia Q:2>}QgX}  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD |XaIx#n  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia v> LIvi|]  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, =6j&4p `  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au nD_GL  
78 McCarty et al. HZ aV7dOZ8  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural $njUXSQ;  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural \T4v|P w\  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify A!od9W6  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a /Wi[OT14  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of :tz#v`3o  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, :NhO2L  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of 7o7)0l9!  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. !S$:*5=&  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local fe\mL mK9  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. |)IlMG  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian M92dZ1+6  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. rlMLW  
Assessment of cataract qLO4#CKCL6  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after :N:yLd} &  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine pd:WEI ,  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the RFi S@.7  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using xipU8'ac/  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and &y ct!YOB2  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on kDEX N  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) x!?u^  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, IQAZuN"<  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, q}b dxa  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than 8Q.T g.  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to ;(b9#b.  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual ^a/gBC82x  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, 6, ^>mNm  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. %2}-2}[>  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to 6`&a&%,O  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the ;"xfOzQ  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight ~G)S   
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the ;d@#XIS&-(  
analyses. U2ohHJ``  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., T"(&b~m2b4  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in dhC$W!N7!  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. >>QY'1Eu  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman mbKZJ{|4s  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph 0B[="rTS7#  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were bYc V$KJk  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera ; 8_{e3s  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 'I`&Yo~c9  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately R &n Pj~  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated  |{&{  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies , xw#NG6  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were ~b(i&DVK  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, bc*X/).  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph vXev$x=w-  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical FX;QG94!  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) goLL;AL  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to ]q\b,)4 e  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. c|f<u {'  
Assessment of risk factors *tGY6=7O  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information l(yZO$  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 QfmJn((  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration S};#+ufgTt  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, .[YuRLGz  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension Plc-4y1  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and &g#@3e1>  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were sm9k/(-  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to %J#YM'g  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants  pD(j'[  
and use of vitamin supplements. 5b5x!do  
Data management and statistical analysis +u.1 ;qF  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a SfA\}@3  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, 65L6:}#  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or {M3qLf~z#C  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at {vs uPY  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms lVd^ ^T*fh  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and 57aXQ8u{  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency ~W*FCG# E  
checks were performed on the entire data set. "7U4'Y:E  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was [<7@{ ;r  
employed for statistical analyses. ^9m\=5d  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific C,wL0Yj[  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to > f^r^P  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five H[m:0 eF'5  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates Gq+z/Be  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific !]42^?GH  
data were weighted according to the 1996 @>u}eB>Kn  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the I?]ohG K  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. Wf u(*  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared ~Uu 4=  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated iMAfJ-oN  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted -O1>|y2rU  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the =FlDb 5t{  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. C](f>)Dz /  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically 6RG)` bu  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use >l]Xz*HE  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The >/g#lS 5  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment :C7_Jp*Qv  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with d<% z 1Dj2  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence "76 ]u)  
limits.  >d*iD  
RESULTS ?iPC*  
Study population //* fSF   
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 !_"@^?,q  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) 2I%MAb&1@  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did %.vQU @2A  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was u&1q [0y  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as +vvv[  
a whole. MPCBT!o 4Z  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to U [*FCD!~  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The e 63uLWDT  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to wL;l Q&  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural )n+Lo&C<  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) s2teym,uG  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. hq%?=2'9?  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery ks"|}9\%<  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases E;,u2[3  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any .}&` TU  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). Z?}dq- Vh&  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three &wi e]  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence <nE>XAI_7  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes BZ:H`M`n  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% t=|evOz]  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract oT^{b\XN  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract ./,/y"x  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall t5[ #x4 p  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was GO8GJ;B-U  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). , 0imiv  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract os,* 3WO  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified y603$Cv  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated 4^TG>j?M  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents a AJU`=uq  
as information about risk factor exposure was not aI Jt0;  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed %JXE5l+pJ  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence 6`O.!|)  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic L0* nm.1X  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a lV`Q{bd+  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use F5?m6`g?  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private cVubb}ou  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, |rJ=Ksc  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. uZc`jNc\  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the #z&& M"*a|  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having uv=.2U46  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract  `dFq:8v  
surgery were not available. &S( .GdEf  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate >SML"+>  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had =4[v 3Qx  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been M:-.o  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment 3 DDML,  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant "B =  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression b?TO=~k,  
model. The factors that remained significantly related 2@9Tfm(=  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever ]vgB4~4#LP  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been  Jd%H2`  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors f #?fxUH~  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate &0 NFb^8+  
model. O$IEn/%+  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract cc#gEm)3C  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with U'R)x";=  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 6b+b/>G0  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort O J/,pLYu  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total )#.<]&P}  
(years) (%) (%) (%) X=hYB}}nu  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) 9:,V 5n =  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) hJDi7P  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) >iD )eB  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) sA'6ty  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) ;k7 xMZs  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) XLAN Np%E  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) s0DGC  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) BB~OqZIP  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) UG)8D5  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) LXEfPLS  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) mH Ic f{RG  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) b!sRk@LGZ  
Age-standardized 4F {)i  
(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) l~6?kFy9h  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 E_8\f_%wK  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% 1 E73i_L  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, / C>wd   
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). MxY/`9>E|+  
Outcomes of cataract surgery rb1`UG"h$  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior ai nG6Y<O`  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were Hm$=h>rY9[  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular -C<zF`jO  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular <^zHE=h"  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact >B2:kY F  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of [P 06lIO  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected 2 !At2P2  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% |!"2fI  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes ?r?jl;A&  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, -5T=:2M  
P = 0.027). 7.Z@Wr?  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity ^my].Qpt  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without ,4ei2`wV  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract 4dhvFGlW  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, *,Za6.=  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the e_/b2"{  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 f-5:wM&  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this z}{afEb  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four e_V O3"  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these RB+N IoQQ|  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction |i ZfYi&^  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one 7c~u=U"  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract ~i21%$  
surgery. $ 6CwkM:  
DISCUSSION -.T&(&>^  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically j%y$_9a7  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract HO[wTB|D]  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes 1P(|[W1  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual wbe<'/X+  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and F35#dIs`&  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is ZeEWp3vW  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, D`xHD#j h  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract ]ix!tb.Q  
services throughout Australia. <D::9c j  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age ;s~X  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is O)Y?=G)  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous ;L,mBQB?0b  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye ]>+PnP35G  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract OQ,NOiNkap  
between studies because of different methodologies and eYC^4g%l(  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well l/Vo-#  
as the different age structures of the study populations. +n7?S~R$  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of E"L2&.  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. 8HZs>l  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity fPR$kc h  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. sg8/#_S1i  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the _ z;q9&J)  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. +z9gbcx  
80 McCarty et al. _$p$")  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort 4]/7 )x?R  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total t!2(7=P30(  
(years) (%) (%) (%) 4pln5v=  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) @G:V  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( w ~ dk#=  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) ZlHDi!T  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) n3lE, b  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) zS E<"( a  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) @m?QR(LJ  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) !J =sk4T  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) cv(PP-'\  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) *FfMI  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) (Z}>1WRju  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) s!9dQ.  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) CdUAy|!`R  
Age-standardized n$aA)"A #  
(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) f""`cdqAOh  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract ^ZM0c>ev=l  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. Fxc)}i`   
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 X1tXqHJF}  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the 9]'($:LF08  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude zKFp5H1!%+  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the ,&Wn [G<2  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). 81%8{yn!$"  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains WS2os Bc  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban >O/ D!j|  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than z NSu  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, ^O^:$nXhYy  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in I NSkgOo  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due,  qW_u  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens k#}g,0@  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. @^ ik[9^H  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable ~^)^q 8  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, jy2IZ o  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that /q\_&@  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and Xj+q~4{|vt  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is :`vP}I ^  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted s,*c@1f?  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement s|bM%!$1  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We ,}D}oo*  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction ]7AX%EG3  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have 7@%'wy&A  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this ^] p  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their % qsvtc`  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants S\NL+V?7h  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the VY 1vXM3y  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ ;/AG@$)  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their J?:[$C5  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to t@bt6J .{  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change |I[7,`C~  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function ?Ce#BwQ>  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in X}4}&  
overall quality of life.22 1@sM1WM X  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually r@)A k  
significant posterior capsule opacification following j,%EW+j$  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% |@VF.)_  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated \94jrr  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear ,WTTJN  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an [!*xO?yCJ  
opaque capsule. X}JWf<=q  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and }N3`gCy9eN  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, ] V G?+  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We A]y*so!)>  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more z& 'f/w8  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is Z$2L~j"=!  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 3 XVk#)lw  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any @!H '+c  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of Jh2Wr!5  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care ?eWJa  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without @W9H9 PWv&  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the a&5g!;.  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated h(:<(o@<  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. zO2{.4  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem I6w/0,azC  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract dq 8+m(7k  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will ~zMKVM1Q.,  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the O)5 #Fcp(  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in 'O "kt T  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well {})y^L  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes u9>6|w+  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. 1o#vhk/ "+  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract [:pl-_.C  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for A}4t9|/K6  
cataract extractions increases. 3/tJDb5  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS !fZLQc  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants 0WS|~?OR@  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the uHrb:X!q  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell 9Z9l:}bO  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and _S<?t9mS  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient \*9Ua/H  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal .nPL2zO  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. vTcZ8|3e  
REFERENCES !&0a<~ Wi  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. $O]^Xm3{@  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. M\jB)@)  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, (olLB  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population aZxO/b^j  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. k) 3s?  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens Wa}"SqYr h  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated .J:;_4x  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. H CuK  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related ywe5tU  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. G)4SWu0<t  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52.  mc~`  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye #O><A&FrF`  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population y\z*p&I  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: t@r#b67WJe  
363–71. `M6YblnJZ  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. P_mi)@  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye p&m ^IWD  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. b+_hI)T  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. :=Nb=&lst  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient ]p}#NPe5  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. wU.'_SBfB  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. %/X2 l  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated M-vC>u3Y  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. %db3f z  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. E"ZEo9y@^  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too S>(z\`1qm  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal ;i/"$K  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: we }#Ru*  
77–80. _J` |<}?t;  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice #*+;B93 )  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? TdNsyr}JG  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. e{:86C!d)  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest g&q^.7c}  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye f8R+7Ykx  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic +J%6bn)U  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. B%)zGTp6  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading &^AzIfX}Gw  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. F{kG  
82 McCarty et al. *m iONc  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & ,zc"udpKF  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. PnI)n=(\  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume 8rla0d@  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International 7 FEzak'  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. RA! x  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and @wg&6uQ  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. zUe#Wp[  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison ^ b=5 6~[  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased |}l@w +N3  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment 3S; >ki4(0  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. `MN&(!&C*  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the 9NJ= ~Ub-  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health 1!K !oY  
Organization, 1997. rOs)B21/  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, B.h0" vJ  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation L%TxP6z4A  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. se4w~\/  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. mABwM$_  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of 46QYXmNQ}  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative ,ivWVsN*]  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. H[>klzh6 !  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. CUAg{]  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated }dV9%0s!  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. \c5#\1<  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. Fm-q=3  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract n_e}>1_  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and @vVRF Z  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. EZgxSQaPH  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. O=4c eE mz  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to -f-O2G=  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. KT]J,b  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. '<*CD_2t-  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A =Qjw.6@  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule ^Yg|P&e(;  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. i9f7=-[U_  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. e0G}$ as  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health q9g[+*9]$  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. VR5e CJ:i  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in B6Wq/fl/  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, <IHFD^3|j  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract $9 &Q.Kpq>  
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:
5+2=? 正确答案:7
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交