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 w$j{Hp6m  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes RNTa XR+Zn  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to yHNuU)Ft  
unoperated cataract in Australia. 1a$IrQE  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual r?p[3JJ;mG  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than (WRMaI72(  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination +~Tu0?{Z 0  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography ?^9BMQ+  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who B>z?ClH$R  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater o0ZBi|U\4  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or zrRFn `B  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. h?Nek+1'  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne  l{$[}<  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 (}smW_ `5  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria 83 I-X95  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract >2b`\Q*<  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had `G!M>h@  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 ^lj7(  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber Wd8R u/  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber >&U @f  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated =']3(6*  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or Y$<D9f s3  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven iWA|8$u4gm  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate kWhr1wR1  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery ~ #PLAP3-  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% !'G~k+  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone J !HjeZ  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an *?t%0){  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision K j3?ve~  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no hyg8wI  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural =0 qpVFvU  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance ,q#0hy%5/  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated A+getdr  
cataract. g}x(hF  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is -WJ?:?'  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced  ?K_ '@  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of X4|4QgY  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes -0C@hM,wm  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. T-_"|-k}P%  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health 2]cRXJ7h  
services accessibility, prevalence p-GAe,2q  
INTRODUCTION z (?=Iv3  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in -7 U| a/  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all &;&ho+qD  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate 8s{?v &p  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be lQ'GX9hN@  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 v\tEVhm  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting kF"@Ngv.  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is 9iUrnG*  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in )3Z ^h<"j  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists RTh`ENCKR  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather h:Gu`+D>W  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral G+UMBn  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has eqw0]U\pv  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for l vMlL5t  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has L>y J  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 x^4xq#Bb7  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is (0YZZ93  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the .sC?7O =  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract Y2o?gug  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence 7Mb# O_eh  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors (q+)'H%iK  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to S}p4iE"n  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. /x_o!<M  
METHODS 4RSHZAJg  
Study population h$4Hw+Yxs]  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual %?e& WLS  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 *%{gYpn  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to h4q|lA6!k8  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. .pvi!NnL-  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of 8GvJ0Jq}U  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen j@YU|-\qh  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites f7m%|v!  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. !O`(JSoG  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 yzqVz_Fi*W  
Original Article uc;8 K,[t  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia :x tXQza"-  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD N5a*7EJv+  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia c-B cA  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, -r-k_6QP  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au W[Ls|<Q  
78 McCarty et al. q WQ/ 'M  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural C?lcGt!H  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural 9I6a"PGDb  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify .Y&)4+ckL  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a ;M)Q wF1  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of r"P|dlV-  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, r>o63Q:  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of *MKO I'  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. vEJWFoeEFm  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local  C uB`CI  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. -*1J f&  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian @7IIM{  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. KrQ1GepJ  
Assessment of cataract s.$3j$vT 8  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after E7rDa1  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine <0Xf9a8>  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the E|iQc8gr&  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using .+$ Q<L  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and 9Z4nAc  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on ]s<[D$ <,  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) pM4 :#%V  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, |-:()yxs  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, h9}+l  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than ]Sf]J4eQ  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to (A9Fhun  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual +^60T$  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, ]cHgleHQ  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. ]d$8f  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to j()7_  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the ZMQ Zs~;~d  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight 6' k<+IR  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the {$0mwAOH "  
analyses. <cps2*'  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., Ni9/}bb  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in *#,7d"6W5  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations.  -*1d!  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman UXJ eAE-  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph =W(Q34  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were $*^7iT4q_t  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera '$i: 2mn,  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 D+rxT: d  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately X-bcQ@Oj  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated |mZxfI  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies KI"#f$2&  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were ~[t[y~Hup  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, h79}qU  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph Vr3Zu{&2  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical "Wct({n  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) W: z6Koc0  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to j\eI0b @*  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. 'g}!  
Assessment of risk factors sA+ }TNhq  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information Yj&F;_~   
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 k R?qb6  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration >xN .F/[K  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, ) ;EBz  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension  on4HKeO  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and `aOFs+<)  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were s n8Q k=K  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to D(~U6SR  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants f[]dfLS"W  
and use of vitamin supplements. .#EF LXs  
Data management and statistical analysis !Lu2  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a Pd8![Z3  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, n*h)'8`Ut  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or  4j*  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at W~)}xy  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms &eJfGt5  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and %[GsD9_-  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency ^vZS UfS  
checks were performed on the entire data set. 91/Q9xY  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was \<bx [,?  
employed for statistical analyses. &w\{TZ{  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific 9p]QM)M  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to Usvl}{L[  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five  -uS!\  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates YqscZ(L:y  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific 9i:L&d N  
data were weighted according to the 1996 Y_liA  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the 7^avpf)>  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. -E[Kml~U  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared O 2 V  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated jRa43ck  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted PrqlTT}Px  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the &$+AXzn  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. x>K Or,f  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically 1C+13LE$U  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use 2DA]i5  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The A I2) g1m  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment D\v+wp.  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with  }FROB/  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence 2k~l$p>CN!  
limits. z(ONv#}p  
RESULTS &u ."A3(  
Study population T=DbBy0-  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 qz_7%c]K[  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) _;S-x  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did k=$TGqQY?  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was ,L2ZinU:  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as |l^uEtG  
a whole. XT%nbh&y  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to CZwXTHe  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The #lo6c;*m5  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to Y1\}5k{>  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural B:Oa}/H   
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) |*xA 8&/  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. WDYeOtc  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery }0*@fO  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases `g?Negt\v  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any x j)F55e?  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). O/(`S<iip  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three R%WCH?B<}  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence k .; j  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes wU36sCo  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% Q$W  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract SHxNr(wJ<Q  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract eQm1cgMdz  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall ;8&3 dm]  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was |Zpfq63W  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). (,\+tr8r8  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract Jt<_zn_FG  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified .VJMz4$] O  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated -Cpl?Io`r5  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents Yl Q=5u^+  
as information about risk factor exposure was not =o(5_S.u;  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed X7 MM2V  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence {6|G@ ""O  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic HZB>{O   
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a 2;`1h[,-^  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use [({nj`  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private 2#]#sZmk  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, ^zmG0EH,  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. /4V#C-  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the J?1 uKR  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having wk D^r(hiH  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract jXx<`I+]  
surgery were not available. rQs )O<jl  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate [A~xy'T  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had .t-4o<7 3  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been BLdvyVFx  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment %6,SKg p  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant qvsd5PeCO  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression OA1uY83"  
model. The factors that remained significantly related Ecefi pG  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever \;3~a9q%  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been py!|\00}  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors NjScc%@y  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate Ad8n<zt|  
model. bKY7/w<dP  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract wC+u73599  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with XGWSdPJLr  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79  a=9:[  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort 4<Utmr  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total VcO0sa f`  
(years) (%) (%) (%) )e+>w=t  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) F=e8IUr  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) zuad~%D<I  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) ?m}s4a  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) m)t;9J5  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) ]"hFC<w  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) KNvZm;Q6  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) @ $ ;q ;  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) U0y%u  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) :'-/NtV)o?  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) Eqd<MY7  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) dO<ERY  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) |!3DPA(_  
Age-standardized w !-gJmX>  
(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) {j?FNOJn  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 *xxx:*6rk;  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% q]ku5A\y  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, p Z|V 3  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). (l~AV9!m:  
Outcomes of cataract surgery 2ozax)GY  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior  NI76U  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were |P HT694Uz  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular s 8jV(P(O  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular _ @NL;w:!  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact X; \+<LE  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of |}s*E_/[  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected u"cV%(#  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% X"|['t  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes p J! mw\:  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, [" k,QX  
P = 0.027). }I+E\ <  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity abmYA#  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without ]3],r?-tJ  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract :1. L}4"gg  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, v!-/&}W)1  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the .=7vI$ujd  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 D(@S+r_ota  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this j ?3wvw6T  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four $kdB |4C  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these O-0x8O^B  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction  c(f  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one ~OYiq}g  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract }#RakV4  
surgery. Hh3X \  
DISCUSSION `iFmrC<  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically Fc)@,/R"v  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract d `=MgHz  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes !I{0 _b{  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual 8+Lm's=W*  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and + /4 A  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is }1L4 "}L.  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, gS!:+G%  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract ^,lIK+#Elz  
services throughout Australia. Q",t3i4  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age .ljnDL/  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is U*rcd-@  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous 3V+] 9;  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye dK$XNi13.5  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract 6##_%PO<m  
between studies because of different methodologies and :[.vM  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well ^lnK$i  
as the different age structures of the study populations. pT th}JM>  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of p}}R-D&K  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. '|6]_   
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity 1SQ3-WU s  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. V@.Ior}w  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the gMi0FO'  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. ch*8 B(:  
80 McCarty et al. o*+"|  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort X~b X5b[P  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total `P@<3]  
(years) (%) (%) (%) *P[ hy  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) YH}'s>xZz  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( WMDl=6  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) rET\n(AJ  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) M5 LfRBO  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) LRxZcxmy  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) h:))@@7MJ  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) ;DQ ZT  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) RT4x\&q  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) V5@:#BIs  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) ^do9*YejX;  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) djl*H  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) u= *FI  
Age-standardized *g"Nq+i@  
(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) /s&9SYF  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract /obfw^  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. JJ-( Sl  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 d UE,U=  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the 98c(<  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude ^]Y> [[  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the KJUH(]>F  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). x3=A:}t8  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains #b}Z`u?@  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban .^33MWu6  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than *\a4wZ6<3  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, un"Gozmt5  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in #<"~~2?  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, |)DGkOtd  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens  #4NaL  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. Pl06:g2I  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable bjW]bRw  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, St9?RD{4;  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that @Ns Qd_e  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and ,5p(T_V/  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is +4~_Ei[i  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted Lnl(2xD  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement T@B/xAq5!  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We i v38p%Zm  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction :gibfk]C  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have Y;M|D'y+  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this BsDn5\ q  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their 3,3N^nSD  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants {*" |#6-  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the !sP {gi#=  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ *I.f1lz%*  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their S!CC }3zw  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to BoWg0*5xb  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change R4cM%l_#W  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function `i*E~'  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in B hGu!Y6f  
overall quality of life.22  skVi Mo  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually sY Qk  
significant posterior capsule opacification following j{A y\n(  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% 7(8;t o6(  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated \'D0'\:vz  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear *vxk@ `K~  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an b5vC'B-!  
opaque capsule. G4X|Bka  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and xs bE TP?  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, q,|j]+9q  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We !)0;&e5  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more I d .nu/  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is IueF x u  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 IY\5@PVZ  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any 6j]0R*B7`Q  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of kfY}S  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care VU]`&`~J  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without N +_t-5  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the >W+%8e  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated qiBVG H  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. k9 I %PH  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem bJ {'<J  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract Zt{[ *~  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will Hd ={CFip  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the CxW>~O:  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in {]@= ijjf  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well 0-Ku7<a  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes (vJNHY M  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. LCKV>3+_#  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract %pL''R9VF  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for -zeG1gr3  
cataract extractions increases. A]oV"`f  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS >@_^fw)  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants `l[c_%Bm  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the !M1"b;  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell <<5(0#y#  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and `d`T*_  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient SO'vp z{  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal y??XIsF  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. vXZOy%$o  
REFERENCES 0GCEqQy8  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. Qe:seW  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. >0TxUc_va  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, M!^az[[  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population ~=l;=7 T  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. . 3T3E X|G  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens )Y{L&A  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated y766; X:J  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. 8'io$ 6d=  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related SoSb+\* @h  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. R!gEwTk   
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. j'"J%e]  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye `Eo.v#<  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population n9ej7oj  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: M!D3}JRm  
363–71. GH$pKB  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. =MDys b&:  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye ope^~+c~\  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. x7<K<k;s  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. H8}oIA"b  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient =^,m` _1  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. pB0 \\wR  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. uiR8,H9*M  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated |[b{)s?x  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. ZyFjFHe+  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. <*cikXS  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too 8$Y9ORs4  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal di )L[<$DY  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: A_q3KB!$=+  
77–80. `*1p0~cu  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice hZt!/?dc  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? %:* YO;dw'  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. tf`^v6m%]  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest d5:c^`  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye m^;f(IK5  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic }b.%Im<3R  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. n,WqyNt*  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading PALc;"]O  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. 0oIe> r  
82 McCarty et al.  H6/$d  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & d>qY{Fdz  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. Q>Yjy!. <^  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume ^Xh^xL2cn  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International nZYBE030  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. }:)&u|d_  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and k@W1-D?  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. YT(AUS5n  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison A6(/;+n  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased H"WprHe  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment XlR@pr6tw  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. 0flRh)[J  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the SO0PF|{\r  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health 20Wg=p9L  
Organization, 1997. 1p=]hC  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, H9e<v4 c  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation $6SW;d+>n  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. (<C3Vts))  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. pFjK}J OF  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of /9fR'EO{x  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative 6T`i/".  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. 4'=y:v2  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. $6poFo)U+  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated )l DD\J7  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. 'TB2:W3  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. kE1TP]|  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract ncT&Gr   
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and IW] rb/H  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. /N.U/MPL_  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. ;;/{xvQ.1  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to 4^o^F-k'  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. `'7R,  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. KoT%Mfu  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A FGq [ \B  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule pOoEI+t  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. [ub e6  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. \:LW(&[!  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health 5]:U9ts#  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. NC6&x=!3  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in [v!f<zSQK  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, M kXmA`cP  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract QQc -Ya!v  
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:
4+6=? 正确答案:10
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交