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]J3hKs 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:sP 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
T4H oSei film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately
I7q?V1fu4 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
ZR q}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'_zSz 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@$1 limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes
ot<o& with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5%
>N1]h'q> (65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract
F j('l (97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract
<Jrb"H[T" surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall
U7%pOpO! weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was
~@?-|xLqQ 3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2).
Y"rV[oe Risk factors for unoperated cataract
+5|nCp6||j Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified
'wnY>hN as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated
2965 7k8 cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents
w*P4_=
:%Y as information about risk factor exposure was not
sq|@9GS0T available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed
'J0s%m|j in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence
0F'UFn>{ (urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic
@M?EgVmW integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a
&B0&183 measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use
ER0#$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"$ky,tU factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression
U2nRgd model. The factors that remained significantly related
<r3n?w8 to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever
=PM#eu seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been
M=_CqK* diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors
SJ+-H83x
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate
&bu`\|V model.
1*b%C"C The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract
(1]@ fCd + who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with
C,u.!g;lm Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79
Y2&6x
Th Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort
l= S_#
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total
^-Ji]5~ (years) (%) (%) (%)
nzl,y, 40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08)
XX6)(
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10)
2GS2,
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15)
[~S0b Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24)
6mLE-(
Z7 60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0)
7B`0mK3 Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7)
&>+Z$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
TQF
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.
\wMr[_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.
IMpEp}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
,*ZdMw! 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.
WB S~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_lD0 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.
=E Cw' 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.