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 a Qmfrx  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes ou;qO 5CT  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to [tm[,VfA^  
unoperated cataract in Australia. JmjxGcG  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual DoG%T(M!a9  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than & Y=.D:z<  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination ?{j@6,  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography %|jzEBz@  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who a hwy_\  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater jnDQ{D  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or wDZ  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. L1F###c  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne cdN/Qy  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 }\4p3RQrz  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria e2Ww0IK!E  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract k)i"tpw  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had  s<d!+<  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 vQy$[D*  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber 3/l\ <{  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber shy  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated Hy;901( %  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or '5V^}/  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven )+*{Y$/U  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate [5!'ykZ  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery  'X|v+ ?  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% s1Okoxh/!V  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone y]J3h Ks  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an ) (+)Q'*  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision -$OD}5ku#  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no ,b:n1  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural zfirb  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance PK_Fx';ke^  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated {f&NStiB  
cataract. 4uX,uEa  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is @c0n2 Xcr  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced ~~ U<  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of T7^ulG 1'  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes xkF$D:s P  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. >/8ru*Oc  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health g>UBZA4  
services accessibility, prevalence C?{D"f `[]  
INTRODUCTION #>@<n3rq  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in ?_8%h`z  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all fVG$8tB  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate \y[Bu^tk  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be ]NbX`'  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 lt{lH at1  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting )\0Ug7]?  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is qbEKp HnB  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in %)BwE  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists NY.}uZ  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather KbXbT  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral >_&~!Y.Z=  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has tCuN?_ UG  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for c!tvG*{  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has ".Lhte R?  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 (m<R0  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is yJF 2  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the o G (0i  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract f0/jwfL  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence '.]e._T  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors M4zX*&w.T  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to n33JTqX  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. fndK/~?]H  
METHODS =$^Wkau  
Study population b^uP^](J  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual R#"U/8b>z  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 l5{(z;xM  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to V<7R_}^_7  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. 70'} f  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of A Oby*c  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen @`w'   
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites 66I|0_  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. &_< VZS  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 RY\{=f  
Original Article 4(` 2#  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia a/`c ef  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD  6'RZ  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia =giM@MV  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, s,eld@  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au ^/_\etV  
78 McCarty et al. F,' ^se4&  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural )z]q"s5 Y  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural NWo7wVwc/c  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify 844tXMtPB\  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a uS! 35{.>  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of (P E# Y(  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, K$MJ#Zx^  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of #JJp:S~`   
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. r*X}3t*  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local |@o]X?^  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. rK(x4]I l"  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian xm%[}Dt]  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. jjS{q ,bo  
Assessment of cataract `-72>F;T  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after jSeA %Te  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine veYsctK~  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the 37:b D  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using '(3Nopl  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and >gX0Ij#G  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on Sy+]SeF&  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) Y{Y;EY4  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, Z]7;u>2  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, @yU!sE:  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than _V_ 8p)%  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to \p>]G[g  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual s0XRL1kWr  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, #q~3c;ec  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. 66^1&D"  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to O?j98H Sya  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the =E{{/%u{{S  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight Ww'TCWk@  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the Uf7F8JZmM  
analyses. YmO"EWb  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., i">z8?qF  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in }l]3m=)  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. &m%Pr  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman DmXDg7y7s  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph X>6 ~{3  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were zCGmn& *M  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera ( Qx-KRH  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 T4HoSei  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately I7q?V1f u4  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated 282+1X  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies VHgF#6'   
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were I7G\X#,iz  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, XZep7d}  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph G3_mWppH  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical XD+cs.{5  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) -;@5Ua1uf  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to + }(B856+  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. /K1 $_   
Assessment of risk factors =qS^Wz.  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information 6t7;}t]t  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 c>U{,z  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration Yyo9{4v+p{  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, o. V0iS]  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension P2 K>|r  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and G8(i).Q  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were !(ux.T0  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to L"[w a.<  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants 7ck0S+N'b  
and use of vitamin supplements. zy/tQGTr@  
Data management and statistical analysis wh7a|  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a mk`cyN>m  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, .f92^lu9  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or [q>i  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at l LD)i J1  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms WlQ&Yau  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and dVmAMQk.g  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency E-U;8cOMv  
checks were performed on the entire data set. Lx:9@3'7'  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was <j8&u/Za~'  
employed for statistical analyses. zWmo OnK  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific a@=36gx)  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to DHumBnQ  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five tCCi|*P G  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates Ye=7Y57Nr  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific H'h4@S  
data were weighted according to the 1996 .Qi1I  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the % qjyk=z+Z  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. E=_B@VJknW  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared iJKm27 ">  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated s8_NN  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted -IsdU7}  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the v^18o$=K",  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. rPGE-d3  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically ZRq}g:  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use n IqY}??  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The 89- 8v^ Pq  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment OTHd1PSOu  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with A&lgiR*ObT  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence p$o&dQ=n[  
limits. "O1*uwm  
RESULTS f, j(uP  
Study population s1vYZ  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 W;g+R-  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) qjEWk."  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did YM.IRj2/1  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was ?gMrcc/{  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as Qnb?hvb"d  
a whole. [tK:y[nk  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to 83,1d*`  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The uZ?CVluP  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to +P)[|y +e  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural j{-7Pf8A  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) Odjd`DD1  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. Jas|P}{=fT  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery {s'_zS z  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases TvG:T{jwy  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any <RVtLTd/  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). (tLQX~Ur  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three =X5&au o  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence N\e@$1  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes ot<o&  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% >N1]h'q>  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract Fj('l  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract <Jrb"H[ T"  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall U7%pOpO!  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was ~@?-|xLqQ  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). Y"rV[oe   
Risk factors for unoperated cataract +5|nCp6||j  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified 'wnY>hN  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated 29657k8  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents w*P4_= :%Y  
as information about risk factor exposure was not sq|@9GS0T  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed 'J0s%m|j  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence 0F'UFn>{  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic @M?EgVmW  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a &B0&183  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use ER0#$yFpM  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private PR6uw  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use,  at]Q4  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. 5(`GF|  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the >:E-^t%  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having oxXW`C<  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract U (7P X`1  
surgery were not available. n<&R"89  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate w=o m7%J@l  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had gc[J.[  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been B4&pBiG&f6  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment %GiO1:t  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant K"$ky,tU  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression U2nRgd  
model. The factors that remained significantly related <r3n?w8  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever =PM#eu  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been M= _CqK*  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors SJ+-H83x  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate &bu`\|V  
model. 1*b%C"C  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract (1]@ fCd +  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with C,u.!g;lm  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 Y2&6x Th  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort l= S_#  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total ^- Ji]5~  
(years) (%) (%) (%) nz l,y,  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) XX6)(  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) 2GS2,   
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) [~S0b  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) 6mLE-( Z7  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) 7B`0mK3  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) &>+Z$ZD  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) Z3{Qtysuv3  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) {qyo#  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) M - TK  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) TA7w:<  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) 6V/mR~F1r  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) 8+F2 !IM  
Age-standardized $hh=-#J8  
(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) Mla,"~4D5  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 `#F>?g$2  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% n 1h+`nsf  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, s]OXB {M  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). "p\ KePc;@  
Outcomes of cataract surgery 7\lc aC@  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior tnntHQ&b  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were E)bP}:4V  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular d[de5Xra  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular YQJ_t@0C  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact H]\H'r"  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of 5E}i<}sq5  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected ga1RMRu+  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% #=rI[KI  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes hQO~9mQ+!  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, 7 m%|TwJN  
P = 0.027). +dRTH z  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity Gf>T{Q`,is  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without 6}0#({s:R  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract Bvwk6NBN  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, UHHe~L  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the 0@KBQv"v  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 mz''-1YY$  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this bbnAmZ   
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four Cv3H%g+as  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these _]NM@'e  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction TQ F D  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one ;a|A1DmZ  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract mGX;JOjZ  
surgery. &'Ch[Wo]H  
DISCUSSION 4V=dD<3m  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically }  ?  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract 7@ZL (G  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes `8Gwf;P1  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual [}Nfs3IlBw  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and ?tBEB5  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is NWf!c-':  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, umj7-fh  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract xH0Bk<`V:  
services throughout Australia. YEGXhn5E  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age OLv(  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is 15870xS  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous Pai{?<zGi  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye ks! G \<I  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract 45# `R%3  
between studies because of different methodologies and ~-,<`VY  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well 5dhRuc  
as the different age structures of the study populations. U7Ps2~x3  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of z19y>j  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. ")TI,a`  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity Hkpn/,D5  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. \wM r[_LW  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the  gB?#T  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. sLCL\dWT  
80 McCarty et al. K'y;j~`-  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort )@Ly{cw   
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total Pb !kl #  
(years) (%) (%) (%) Zl]\sJ1"  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) 2mI=V.X[&  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( Y6V56pOS  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) @>JO &,od  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) r..\(r  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) b{9q   
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) .0nL; o  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) 3:!+B=woR  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) nx=Zl:Q}  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) 9"oc.ue.2D  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) ']>@vo4kK{  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) S's\M5  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) ^b'|`R+~}  
Age-standardized GYZzWN}U  
(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) 8 yQjB-,#  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract crUt8L-B4  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. 0d~>zKho  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 <T{PuS1<o  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the ZEp UHdin  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude -Z Bk^p  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the Y;4nIWe JL  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). Pqi>,c<&mL  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains =.f]OWehu.  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban 1 @tVfn}  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than " 8>*O;xk  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, a=T_I1  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in kK>PFk(  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, s  `U.h^V  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens d#T~xGqz  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. I MpEp}7  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable ^ 1}_VB)^  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, x!"S`AM  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that :D`ghXj  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and .n'z\] -/Q  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is "X=l7{c/  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted )<nr;n  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement h/W@R_Y  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We Ox#%Dm2  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction LS}dt?78`V  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have a=>PGriL  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this ,Y6Me+5B  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their fH-V!QYGF  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants #8H  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the h(*!s`1  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ tG+ E'OP  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their HdQd =q(  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to ()i8 Qepo}  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change t&MJSFkiA  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function F?TxViL  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in  K6d9[;F  
overall quality of life.22 N,6(|,m  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually zcnp?%  
significant posterior capsule opacification following 8(J&_7 u  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% , g\%P5  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated _7Z|=)  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear ('BFy>@  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an gx~79;6  
opaque capsule. hDTiXc  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and tp"dho  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, bAS('R;4  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We ,*ZdM w!  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more 0EiURVX  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is %v 0 I;t  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 -? {bCq  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any 4Rj;lAlwB  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of #~<cp)!3  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care M5DQ{d<r  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without O/b~TVA  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the v%N/mL+5L  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated <,/k"Y=  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. v|r\kr k  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem T*YbmI]4  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract mRVE@ pc2X  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will n-iy;L^b  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the 6~g`B<(?  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in ~a@O1MB  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well S ykblP37  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes 4wfT8CL  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. uFxhr2 <z  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract ;e~Z:;AR  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for 7g@P$e]  
cataract extractions increases. [>+}2-#  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS " p]bsJG  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants & .XYI3Ab1  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the =~;SUO  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell n27df9L  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and 0V{a{>+  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient S<), ,(  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal "{a-I=s\C  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. % H"A%  
REFERENCES yL =*yC  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. 00s&<EM  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. 3a #X:?  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, }~gBnq_DDU  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population ~~J xw ]  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. Yr9>ATR  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens c*0pF=3  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated "&jWC  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. CE :x;!}cd  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related 9Z! j  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. $@ /K/"  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. n<Vq@=9AE  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye vfb~S~|U6g  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population 'EsN{.l?  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: b j6-0`  
363–71. Z<7FF}i  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. \5g7_3,3W  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye AGwFD  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. ( e> .hfrs  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. U}9B wr^  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient c;M7[y&  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. gO C5  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. o_un=ygU  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated `1I@tz|  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. Fi8'3/q-^  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. NzRpI5\.  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too PFP/Pe Ng;  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal ujF*'*@\  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: ^QX3p,Y  
77–80. SoS GQ&k  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice yn;h.m[):  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? D@[Mk"f  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. JaC =\\B  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest #N`~. 96  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye #lA8yWxr  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic !L3M\Q0  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. {fsU(Jj\  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading .r~!d|  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. z6B(}(D  
82 McCarty et al. 8= jl]q$<  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & x"kc:F  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. Mx,QgYSu  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume _c}@Fi+E  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International *&VH!K#@{  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. \k?uh+xl  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and :r^c_Ui  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. WBS~e  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison }{Y)[w#R  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased P.bBu  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment I>k >^  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. )+]8T6~ N  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the : `D[0  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health LM:|Kydp3  
Organization, 1997. J)O1)fR  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, Vl;GQe  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation w*.q t<rH)  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. ]"SH pq  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. T( @y#09  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of b>|3?G  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative MS{purD  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. !6_lD 0  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. dI!x Ai  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated /s.O3x._'  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. uWw4l"RK`  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. 41luFtE9  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract V>}@--$c-r  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and k|W=kt$P  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. td^2gjr^5  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. aVv$k  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to %1ofu,%  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. aaq{9Y#  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. $ JI`&  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A U~z`u&/  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule -L>\ 58`  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. Y%9S4be  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. T^h;T{H2  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health 7sECbbJT  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. =ECw'  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in )e.Y"5My  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, Zd@'s.,J  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract ?Dro)fH1  
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