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 dXt@x8E  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes ezJ^ r,D|  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to |9CPT%A#  
unoperated cataract in Australia. W}(xE?9&  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual yq[CA`zVN  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than R^ I4_ZA  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination zBrqh9%8e  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography G"yhu +  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who ^?0WE   
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater 1@]gBv<  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or %. IW H9P7  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. Mm"0Ip2"  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne F JxH{N6a  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 z{> )'A/  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria 3AuLRI  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract t_X =x`f  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had QbAEW m  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 pvqbk2BO  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber @2A&eLw LH  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber P.t7_v>  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated /$ueLa  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or +JFE\>O  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven 9[\$\l  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate &>auW}r  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery 6$$ku  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% >R6>*|~S  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone /kd6Yq(y  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an  A,|lDsvM  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision 0',-V2  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no K06&.>v_  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural |S VL%agZ  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance a s?)6  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated >9]i#So^  
cataract. (V+iJ_1g{  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is w=75?3c7F  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced .3 T#:Hl  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of 6m{1im=  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes 'd 6z^Z6  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. Jq?"?d|:  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health 1{X ;&y  
services accessibility, prevalence $5/lU }To  
INTRODUCTION B mxBbg  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in js\|xfDxP  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all zc#aQ.  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate [S!_ubP5  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be y\"Kur*O  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 )`.' QW  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting eyGY8fF8$  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is v81H!c.*  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in VBK9te,A  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists kMLWF  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather 2aUy1*aM  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral <);Nc1  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has /Z*XKIU6v/  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for +8 AGs,  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has -?$Hr\  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 \L: ;~L/  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is >1Y',0v  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the 24 i00s|#  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract ' 4nR^,  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence *h>KeIB;  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors T~rPpi&  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to Y &Sk/8  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. Je#vl4<L  
METHODS 1 f;k)x  
Study population ,wN>,(  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual {\Eqo4A5}  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 Wa {>R2h\  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to &K_"5.7-56  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. 2%'iTXF  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of < d GGH  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen j~eYq  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites \lnpsf  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. SG{> t*E  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 oc>ne]_'  
Original Article RY(\/W#$  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia S'NZb!1+  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD ~L G).  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia pFLR!/J  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, Efm37Kv5l  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au v(? ^#C>6W  
78 McCarty et al. {jX h/`  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural 5h9`lS2  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural |-Z9-rl  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify pv.0!a/M  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a bY4~\cP.  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of 7(m4,l+(  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, f-N:  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of Q7X6OFl?  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. p!MOp-;-  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local ]o <'T.x  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. N:j"W,8  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian 85rXm*Df  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. hKq# i8py  
Assessment of cataract B{wx"mK  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after 1us-ootsjP  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine c}a.  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the w f!?'*  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using +$KUy>  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and VC "66 \d&  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on }(h_ztw  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) 4^T@n$2N  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, Om%{fq&  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, b !FX]d1~k  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than a"^0;a  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to 9NTBdo%u  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual q -%;~LF  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, d'~ kf#  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. NIcPjo  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to hnM?wn  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the -lr)z= })  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight q@K;u[zFK  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the b4GD}kR  
analyses. a?bSMt}  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., Tbl~6P  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in V!#+Ti/w4  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. 1Zc1CUMG  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman USLG G}R  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph ?-CZJr  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were 0 e 1W&  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera }gQ FWT  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 Wk$ 7<gkr  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately lub(chCE[  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated ]-d:wEj  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies hGmJG,H  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were /QDlm>FM4  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, R7: >'*F  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph %?K1X^52d  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical [MfKBlA  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) ?4%'6R  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to %[(DFutJY+  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. i$HA@S  
Assessment of risk factors EgO=7?(pW  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information `2X~3im  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 qMT7g LB'1  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration >%jQw.  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, Afm GA9  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension }HB)%C50.  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and pp{Za@j  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were rb_ cm  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to l]Ozy@ Ib  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants m1DzU q;  
and use of vitamin supplements. _,V 9^  
Data management and statistical analysis LX{ [9   
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a Bw2-4K\"kc  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, l$KC\$?%*  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or 2\h]*x% :  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at .>z)6S_G  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms s)Bl1\Q  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and KKm &~^c  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency +Bk d  
checks were performed on the entire data set. JjarMJr| D  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was u,i~,M  
employed for statistical analyses. P,y*H_@k  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific BS<5b*wG  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to ,$irJz F  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five J7:VRf|,?(  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates p/jC}[$v  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific gMe)\5`\Y  
data were weighted according to the 1996 \T)2J|mW  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the h3rdqx1  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. x(J|6Ey7!n  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared ?Fgk$ WqC  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated w"Gci~]bXU  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted MY>mP  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the EA.4 m3  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. :o$k(X7a  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically b77Iw%x7  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use E.V#Bk=  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The 6Y4sv5G  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment ,l-tLc  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with '?]B ui  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence Jq0aDf f  
limits.  + ]I7]  
RESULTS eXo 7_#  
Study population Zpfsh2`  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 '1'#,u!  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) \\Ps*HN  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did iTTUyftHT  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was m x`QBJ  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as m-V_J`9"  
a whole. N n/me  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to MTm}qx@L  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The P)7:G?OTx  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to Zy !^HS$  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural ^{f ^%)X  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) 'ii5pxeNI  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. y 5>X0tT  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery l/WQqT  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases 3zC<k2B  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any  {yXpBS  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). b +b].,  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three h = <x%sie  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence Sfl. &A(  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes ]7+9>V  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% K+HP2|#6  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract Y52f8qQq  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract fXo$1!  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall ;ZOu-B]q  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was "rHcsuSEw  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). _k'?eZB  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract =}F}XSvXH  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified %s&"gWi  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated }\#u~k!l  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents KE$I!$zO  
as information about risk factor exposure was not G;jX@XqZ  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed B>]4NF\)H9  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence 2!kb?  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic 5rX_85]  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a ^*g= 65!1  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use wZe>}1t  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private _P}wO8  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, T<ka4  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. }.L:(z^L,Y  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the BV"l;&F[  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having v#^_|  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract Pt=@U:  
surgery were not available. .ri?p:a}w  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate Pl/B#Sbf'  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had } q?*13iy(  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been yd=NafPM  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment 'hNRIM1  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant vp|.x |@  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression k*u4N  
model. The factors that remained significantly related ;659E_y>  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever |-Q="7b%  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been Wr6y w#  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors INNTp[  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate BbG=vy8'l  
model. 9i`MUE1Sh  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract jBr3Ay@<  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with dUc?>#TU  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 lz:+y/+1  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort GhC%32F  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total LL%s$>c65A  
(years) (%) (%) (%) h[& \ OD,P  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) g0M/Sv  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) $h|8z  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) 7Um3m yXU  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) ,R*YI  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) mQ=nU  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) jc7NYoT:  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) um=qT)/D  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) H|8i|vbi  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) BDcA_= ^R&  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) JQ<9~J  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) df8aM<&m3  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) qlg?'l$03)  
Age-standardized qwvch^?>FQ  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) </li< 1  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 osPrr QoH  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% tW \q;_DSr  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, _8s1Wh G  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). F2C v,&'  
Outcomes of cataract surgery KF f6um  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior &-(p~[|  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were R zn%!d^$>  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular (k<__W c_t  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular dL|*#e  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact T UO*w  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of qAirH1#  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected `cpUl*Y=  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% o WcBQ|   
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes ?gl[ =N V  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, =Y<RG"]a&J  
P = 0.027). #RVN 7-x  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity Sj9NhtF]f  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without |s{[<;  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract '/ GZ,~q  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, lPOcX'3\  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the {+x;J4  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 Ukg iSv+  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this dx[kG  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four >n6yKcjY]  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these 8~eYN- #W&  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction <:Z-zQp)?  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one ;(~H(]D  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract #hP&;HZ2>"  
surgery. [;qZu`n>  
DISCUSSION ]Q*eCt;l"K  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically z\r|5Z  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract @T 8$/  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes e+7x &-+  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual BHEZ<K[U   
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and A3c&V T6Q  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is #+ 6t|  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, Q2 @Ugt$  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract 4.}J'3 .  
services throughout Australia. TWk1`1|  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age $jtXN E?  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is 2*9rhOK*  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous Ij}k>qO/2  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye zMW[Xx!  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract |"XxM(Dm  
between studies because of different methodologies and 5Sfz0  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well  i%a jL  
as the different age structures of the study populations. -L)b;0%  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of :KL5A1{  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. 6fr@y=s2:  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity XP'7+/A  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. T($6L7 j9  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the u"*Wo'3I|  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. r:*0)UZlD  
80 McCarty et al. @5y ~A}Vd  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort t,m},c(B:  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total F"*.Qq  
(years) (%) (%) (%) eaGd:(  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) @3@oaa/v  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( hB:}0@l6p=  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) K)d]3V!  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) }|Wn6X  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) )^'g2gVK+p  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) a1n j}1M%  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) <h7FS90S  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) "X7;^yY  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) |#6))Dh  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) RN0=jo!58  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) !=w&=O0(  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) (T]<  
Age-standardized D ^~G(m;-  
(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) k-uwK-B}v+  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract 5sc`L  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. Z1t?+v+Ro*  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 t@(`24  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the X\a*q]"_  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude _Ka6! 9  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the 4tb y N  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). =]auP{AlE  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains Zoi\r  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban E =7m@" 0  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than \~#$$Q-qtU  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, -!kfwJg8N(  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in #cRw0bn:  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, +TQMA >@g<  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens /s\_"p  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. ^^-uq)A  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable ba-J-G@YW  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, <e s>FD  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that Y8^pgv  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and O" <W<l7Q  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is [9:'v@Ph  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted RKY~[IQ,  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement FccT@ ,.F  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We d0;$k,  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction *r&q;ER  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have XU3v#Du  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this 9<9 c^2  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their pnvHh0ck_  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants ;-OnCLr  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the [CBhipoc  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ ~_z"So'|F_  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their Jf/X3\0N7  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to 4r&S&^  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change h27awO Q  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function vu&%e\gM   
has been shown to be associated with improvement in ?3{R'Buv]  
overall quality of life.22 ZwV`} 2{  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually rT2gX^Mj&  
significant posterior capsule opacification following #q06K2  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% -7^A_!.  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated H9x,C/r,  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear =?*6lS}gy  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an h"7:&=e  
opaque capsule. y;!qE~!3  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and acSm+t  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, sg.8Sd"]7  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We 'THcO*<  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more >t[beRcR6  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is NV|[.g=lg  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 GwOn&EpY!  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any !J5k?J&{=  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of Nh I&w l  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care $=x1_  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without K+0&~XU  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the SWAggW)  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated yqy5i{Y  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. KtT.WHr(m  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem h\oAW?^  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract 6m.ChlO/  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will O8; `6r  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the .4M8  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in & C~R*  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well iqzl(9o.D  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes .6,+q2tyk,  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. w/8`]q  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract jV(\]g"/=  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for *]ROUk@K=  
cataract extractions increases. *%G$[=  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS )KZ1Z$<  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants U>q&p}z0 H  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the GM.2bA(y  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell hEO#uAR^Z  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and 9;Z2.P"w  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient 4?#0fK  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal |G2hm8 Y  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. 2v!ucd}  
REFERENCES 3Y\7+975m  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. _%HpB=  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. Z_ Gb9  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, [C GFzxz$  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population z*Y4t?+  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. PGT*4r21  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens  &cjE+  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated r ]XXN2[jO  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. 0D;MW  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related |E\0Rv{H3  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. 1B;-ea  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. 'Ii%/ Ob!  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye oo{5 :  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population sGNVZx  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: oB 9t&yM  
363–71. >".,=u'  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. .s4hFB^n  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye < bHu9D  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. RU>Hr5ebo  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. `={s*^Ta  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient nwwKef(  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. ;4jRsirx9  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. -+1it  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated njk.$]M|nf  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. ;T0Y= yC  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. {(}Mu R  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too Ol>"'  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal zy(i] 6  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: ZeD""vJRY  
77–80. @MfuV4 *  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice !B==cNq  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? *_<P% J  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. |>( @n{  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest G Q&9b_  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye Sd;/yC8  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic $or?7 w>  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. P5;LM9W  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading dw )SF,  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. $|v_ pjUu]  
82 McCarty et al. 'hl>pso.  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & <uP>  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. . xT8@]  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume EG5'kYw2  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International X{rw+!  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. SWr?>dl  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and !dfc1UjB  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. V\zf yH\~  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison v}hmI']yf  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased ^(I4Do~}  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment :.!]+#Me  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. >=hO jV;  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the D'aq^T'  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health :8}QKp  
Organization, 1997. 2= X2M  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, 8P r H"pI  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation *>!O2c  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. u-Pa:wm0-  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. &LE,.Q34  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of _[-+%RP  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative c[ ]_gUp8  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. U'S}7gya  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. FL!W oTB  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated )xiiTkJd5  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study.  ~dfc  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. pN/)$6=  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract cZKK\hf<  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and -x2/y:q`  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. t3K7W2bz  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. !YL|R[nDH|  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to )n 1b  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. @cdd~9w  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. 98h,VuKVaB  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A `;b@a<Wl  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule 2yR*<yj  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. SCE5|3j  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. (&0%![j&  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health mdvooJ  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. 6H67$?jMyJ  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in emOd<C1A  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, 1VK?Svnd  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract T!5m'Q.  
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:
freekaobo官方微信订阅号 正确答案:考博
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交