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 e&zZr]vs]l  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes qc_c&  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to p9k' .H^:_  
unoperated cataract in Australia. BtS#I[-p_  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual 6m_ fEkS[  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than Dbt"}#uit;  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination OnE#8*8  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography r9<OB`)3+  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who fB+4mEG@  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater Q@gmtAp  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or $eUI.j(HU  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. "w.gP8`  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne ]cvP !  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473  nen(  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria mOG;[CB  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract $'# hCs  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had 0Z9>%\km_  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 gE$D#PZa  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber c:(Xk zj  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber H/"$#8-/  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated ,TL 8`  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or .} al s  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven jd]Om r!  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate ~JhH ,E  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery 6v(?Lr`D  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% a=n * }.  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone %0 cFs'  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an % NSb8@  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision oPP`)b$x  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no !R@v\Eu  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural G)~/$EF,_  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance (lPiv+'n  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated JmlMfMpXMs  
cataract. 5dwC~vn}c  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is .8[*`%K>  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced C8dC_9  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of ,j3Y vn W  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes 8NP|>uaj  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. Q`= ,&;T>  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health !q]@/<=  
services accessibility, prevalence 3` ,u^ w  
INTRODUCTION J  ZH~ {  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in /i:c! l9  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all M%{ ,?a0V  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate Go;fQ yG  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be Cpg>5N~;L  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 #/"?.Z;SSH  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting r2b_$  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is gXy'@ !  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in ,M?K3lG\g[  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists p)&Yr  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather * 'l|ws  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral bz'#YM  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has ] Hiw+5n  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for eVRPjVzQ'Q  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has ,S V34+(  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 qT153dNA&  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is ; ElwF&"!X  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the bI?uV;m>  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract k]"DsN$  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence BbC aIt  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors R!z32 <5k  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to Bw Cwy  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. \2#j1/d4  
METHODS "K)ue@?  
Study population LW#$%}  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual v!WkPvU  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 D/oO@;`'c  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to p[:E$#W~;  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. IpKpj"eoLy  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of ;Ff5ooL{  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen *IV_evgM7  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites 1 2J#}|  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. <XH,kI(%  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 q*d@5  
Original Article 3#~w#Q0%  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia N2\{h(*u  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD H@V +Q}  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia cB|Rj}40v  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, O%p+P<J  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au z-`-0@/A$  
78 McCarty et al. q+cx.Rc#  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural fSw6nEXn  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural v)-:0 f  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify w6@8cNXK  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a ,,C heRO  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of &]P1IQ  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, _l$X![@6=  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of Ncsk~=[  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. mxkv{;ad  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local l_0/g^(  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. |!\5nix3A>  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian rLJjK$_x  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. \p{$9e;8yT  
Assessment of cataract o.x<h";  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after CvB)+>oa  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine oV=~ Q#v  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the Lzy Ix!S  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using j  hr pS  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and xa$p,_W:'  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on k(%h{0'  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) wh)Ujgd  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, 9w08)2$ Na  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, e!.r- v9  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than rIo)'L$uU  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to \o=Y sJ 8U  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual ua HB\Uc  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, #(f- cK  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. jI~GRk  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to EL+P,q/b  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the 5Ff1x-lQ  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight '>0rp\jC  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the M<VZISu)dy  
analyses. Gp5[H}8K  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., <Z58"dg.5  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in > cM}M=4s  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. -lNT"9  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman Bgy?k K2[  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph [G>U>[u|  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were ?)i`)mu'  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera &R~)/y0]  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 /C"?Y'  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately 6<N Q/*(/  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated C#Y_La  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies c"x-_Uk  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were * M,'F^E2  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, |ZBHXv  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph wjnQK  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical !3 j@gi2  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) 2\, h "W(  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to =p29 }^@@t  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. Sx|)GTJJ|-  
Assessment of risk factors xK W`m  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information iD-,C`  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 QYj8c]8f  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration L4?)N&V  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, lX*IEAc  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension 8R;A5o,  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and tP ;^;nw  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were U#{^29ik=o  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to 9;B6<`e/U  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants m\O|BMHn  
and use of vitamin supplements. r s?"pGz;  
Data management and statistical analysis Pk 6l*+"r<  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a ~Vf+@_G8`  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, 8LZmr|/F*  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or S_EN,2'e  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at ; M%n=+[O  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms 6x$1En  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and AO "pm  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency XKEd~2h<y  
checks were performed on the entire data set. H*M)<"X  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was &!E+l<.RF  
employed for statistical analyses. X\dPQwas M  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific l0%qj(4`6&  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to $% ts#56*  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five .2V`sg.!  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates lNw8eT~2  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific /y.+N`_  
data were weighted according to the 1996 }hPFd  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the j$TTLFK1  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. L-}6}5[  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared NWt`X!  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated uR:@7n  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted uN)o|7  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the +v7mw<6s  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. #_b U/rk)*  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically c[I4'x  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use <+tSTc4>r  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The >5aZ?#TS1  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment /4}B}"`Sl=  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with L/U^1=Wi*O  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence tlnU2TT_f  
limits. g{_wMf  
RESULTS k[`9RGT  
Study population @Weim7r  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 ^bZ'z  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) b3Uw"{p  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did w4m)lQM  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was xDU{I0M  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as `}Of'i   
a whole. l. 9 i `  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to L>&o_bzp  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The GbLuX U  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to ~ry B*eZH  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural ^{IF2_h"  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) u?J !3ZEtb  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. q$|Wxnz  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery "x+o(jOy  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases ~`uEZ  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any w=ib@_:f  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). =Ts3O0"[  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three *CIR$sS  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence G`_LD+  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes 2~*J<iO&l  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% kXfTNMb  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract ]d4`PXI  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract g[NmVY-o  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall ko2T9NI:S  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was al<;*n{/  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). _6tir'z  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract Ap :mc:  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified e2~$=f-  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated rwJCVkF  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents Mx7  
as information about risk factor exposure was not M/O Y "eL  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed 8NE+G.:G  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence F&Bh\C)]  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic Z}8khNCYr  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a +;T `uOF}  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use W<QMUu  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private DR%16y<h  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, fj7\MTy  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. ?g6x y[  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the /.1yxb#Z?,  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having 5 $vUdDTg  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract <-] qU}-  
surgery were not available. DL t"cAW  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate P[G.LO  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had }Ai_peO0a  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been MMQ^&!H  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment jDV;tEY#^  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant 1GaM!OC9  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression o#^(mGj_.  
model. The factors that remained significantly related ^%qe&Pe2  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever PXx:JZsju  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been k6}M7 &nY  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors TI<?h(*R_  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate v>[U*E  
model. _ddOsg|U  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract kA"|PtrW  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with *3 Vic  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 e2dg{n$6"  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort GBvgVX<  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total N| N#-  
(years) (%) (%) (%) S#:yl>2  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) }g9g]\.!a  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) $!ATj`}kb  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) Fs3rsig  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) gB)Cmw*  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) V#P`FX  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) SJJ[y"GvD  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) <y4WG  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) C]bre^q  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) zgnZ72%  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) Wp |qv  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) d$gT,+|vu  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) 8{f~tPY  
Age-standardized Ifu[L&U  
(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) 0zHMtC1 ,  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 \+T U{vr  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% DCheG7lo{  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, }HKt{k&$  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). 49Q tfk  
Outcomes of cataract surgery 7KlS9x2  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior xW. ~Jt  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were =A]*r9  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular WcOnv'l,  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular =H_vRd  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact @d1YN]ede  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of l8~s#:v6X  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected hqW),^\>'  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% W' Y?X]xr  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes  AeR*79x  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, [lz#+~rOS  
P = 0.027). )jPIBzMys  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity o6/"IIso3  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without EpU}~vC9C  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract `Iqh\oY8-  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, + usB$=kJ  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the ;u*I#)7  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 <;lwvO  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this )qua0'y]@  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four -~Chf4?<4  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these ~$jRn(2  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction :Xs3Vh,V  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one >K!$@]2F  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract -x VZm8y  
surgery. 2 -pv &  
DISCUSSION TZ#^AV=ae  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically ~5>k_\ G8  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract gx.\&W b  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes |)y-EBZe\"  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual t"nxny9&  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and va2FgW`Bd+  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is i<{:J -U|  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, zyB>peAp6j  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract pnTz.)'46  
services throughout Australia. Ce/D[%  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age FA{'Ki`  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is +xS<^;   
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous zm mkmTp  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye ~(`&hYE  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract d*dPi^JjC  
between studies because of different methodologies and ^"iJ  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well K+ |0~/0  
as the different age structures of the study populations. L;=3n[^x  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of ]sI\.a  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. 8~sC$sIlE  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity aF[#(PF  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. Te`MIR  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the ?DE{4Ti/[  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. n}C0gt-  
80 McCarty et al. XUA%3Xr  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort X/ Ii}X/p  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total .O SQ8W }  
(years) (%) (%) (%) +LlAGg]Z  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) Js(MzL  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( a1EQ.u  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) m95] z18T'  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) 4n*`%V  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) XePGOw))O  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) |xT'+~u  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) S263h(H  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) wScr:o+K>L  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) zYM0?O8pJ~  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) ANfy +@  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) 'wWuR@e#&  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) (wvU;u  
Age-standardized a`zHx3Yg  
(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) lYey7tl{  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract mC3:P5/c  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. ?J-D6;  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 +|H,N7a<  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the \odns  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude 1kD1$5  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the d$8K,-M  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). E= .clA  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains t>x!CNb'C  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban Htfq?\ FD  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than i^8w0H<-@v  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, k h8 M=  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in ":qS9vW  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, c:+UC  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens JSx[V<7m  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. c[$i )\0  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable f0YBy<a  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, r?dkE=B  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that J% ZM V  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and a54S,}|  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is mX, @yCI  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted j,Qb'|f5  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement ~M1T @Mv  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We AS0mM HJk  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction jo<Gf 5  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have (`u+(M!^  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this 6j!a*u:}"  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their wUfPnAD.'  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants /<dl"PWkJv  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the t{`-G*^  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ P ?96;  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their >5zD0!bA  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to [4@@b"H  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change Z=< D`  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function :c`djM^ll  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in {7q8@`Oa  
overall quality of life.22 - s2Yhf  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually Zm(}~C29  
significant posterior capsule opacification following zm4e+v-  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% 3E>]6  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated &ha<p j~  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear w(ic$  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an yA`,ns&n  
opaque capsule. ^ ,[gO#hgz  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and e`)zR'As  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, 6+C]rEY/o  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We 'lgS) m  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more 5j _[z|W2  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is APU~y5vG (  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 s&DAO r!i  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any 5 L-6@@/  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of eEeK ] 8@  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care Xj:\B] v]  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without 0_t9;;y :  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the ^HHT>K-m  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated lO}I>yo}\  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. j3>&Su>H4  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem /EL3Tt  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract E clsOBg  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will SWNT}{x]  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the 2}5@: cwR+  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in mH'om SCz  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well 0X%#9s ~  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes 5[^Rf'wy  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. _ n4C~  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract "h&[6-0'  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for % "ZC9uq?  
cataract extractions increases. (T",6xBSG  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS #jw%0H;l]  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants WX $AOnEv  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the "}uV=y  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell K !gocNOf  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and .?r} 3Ch  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient #?bOAWAwLh  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal O{=@c96rl  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. F4g3l    
REFERENCES 8`q"] BQN  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. fc%C!^7  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. RP 6hw|  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, bWMb@zm  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population p$6L_ *$  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. ^i17MvT'  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens 6H|&HV(!R  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated {)- 3g~  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. @Sz7*p  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related Ewo6Q){X  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. A*? Qm  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. `W4Is~VVv  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye #M:Vwn JX  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population F=$U.K~1?  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: .Kk'N  
363–71. a.SxMF  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. <* djtO  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye mB*;>   
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. 6am<V]Hw0F  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. `AhTER  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient @Y+9") ?  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. {7 nz:f  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. $`Aps7A  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated EBplr ,  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. 3F9AnS  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. A)D1 #,0  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too ]Hrw$\Ky  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal w0fFm"A|W  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: rNX]tp{j  
77–80. FeuqqZ\=&  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice 'E#Bz"T  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? GP=&S|hi  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. rFYw6&;vOi  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest [!b=A :@  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye .T^e8  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic wnbKUlb  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. UoKXo*W2  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading P:v|JER   
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. EnXTL]=0S  
82 McCarty et al. *W=R:Bl!  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & SFa~j)9'n  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. G^_fbrZjN  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume L2^M#G@t  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International mEDi'!YE"  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. <>^otb,e$  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and /FA0(< -}  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. ^`oyf{w@  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison S(h+,+289  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased Kv-4VWh  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment O O`-{HKt  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. m8<l2O=m  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the o<8=@ ^T  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health 8^6dK  
Organization, 1997. UBve a(z-#  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, AH#klYK  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation 2';f8JLY  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. eNw9" X}g  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. zeG_H}[2&  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of LHJjPf)F  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative ZF6?N?t}h8  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. x*2'I  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. 6Cd% @Q2cr  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated 0413K_  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. O+Qt8,  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. sX$EdIq  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract \5s #9  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and j[<}l&  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. 1JXa/f+  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. 3>t^Xu~  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to jk'.Gz  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. 46cd 5SLK  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. NWq>Z!x`  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A /?wH1 ,  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule r|>a;n Y  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. N-4k 9l1  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. _H+|Ic  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health E u^? e  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. vhQIkB8  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in *6trK`tx^  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, `pzXh0}|  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract l].Gz`L  
Surgery Outcomes Study. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1998; 82: 1107–11.
评价一下你浏览此帖子的感受

精彩

感动

搞笑

开心

愤怒

无聊

灌水

  
描述
快速回复

验证问题:
5+2=? 正确答案:7
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交