ABSTRACT
=`99ez+y Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes
<Y9e n!3\ of cataract surgery and the factors related to
(HDR}!.
E unoperated cataract in Australia.
lE'2\kxI? Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual
?s6v>#H% Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than
;y/&p d+ 5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination
!%?O`+r sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography
^|hlY]Ev were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who
Kejp7okb had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater
~l+2Z4nV than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or
2Jo|]>nl}u posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2.
<Z5-?wgf9 Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne
";yey ] residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473
k#liYw I rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria
aS=-9P;v was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract
-n FKP&P surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had
%PM&`c98z7 had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49
t-B5,,` (20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber
;x%"o[[> intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber
z?dd5.k intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated
FkE)~g eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or
& 6'Rc#\P better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven
K*I!:1;3N (11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate
Kv0V`}<Yc vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery
t.
y-b`v caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9%
mC2K &'[ of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone
P q0%oz intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an
dq,j?~ _} opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision
JTIt!E}P impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no
ZtyDip'x particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural
wXjidOd$ residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance
e, N}z status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated
ZDg(D" cataract.
|Dt_lQp# Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is
u
3^pQ6Q quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced
27k(`{K in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of
b7XB l cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes
j
p_|pC' achieving driving vision following cataract extraction.
>
vdmN] Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health
z/u^ services accessibility, prevalence
|BbzRis INTRODUCTION
h5SJV
a Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in
u\V^g Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all
w
lH
\w? ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate
-Arsmo of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be
4qdoF_ expected from the growth in the elderly population.1
;-6-DEL Although there have been a number of studies reporting
As< B8e] the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is
jMgXIK\ little information about determinants of cataract surgery in
f. "\~ the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists
I]^>>>p$ showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather
;
xZjt4M1 than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral
6$6Q
AW0+f for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has
MfP)Pk5
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for
,;_+o] cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has
CmZayV been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10
V&w2pp0 To appropriately plan health care services, information is
b~J)LXj]w needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the
f<NR6],} community as well as the factors associated with cataract
P(hGkY=( surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence
Y3Fj3NwS of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors
.!x&d4;,q related to unoperated cataract in the community and to
!R=@Nr> describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery.
y3zP`^
METHODS
rW:krx9 Study population
f#\YX
tR,k Details about the study methodology for the Visual
bC/":+s& p Impairment Project have been published previously.11
,~1"50 Hp@ Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to
1u
9hA~rj recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate.
;V
xRaj? Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of
`POz
wYh census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen
FEaT}/h; nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites
#z|Q $ were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents.
KJA
:; Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82
*\sPHz. Original Article
Z0F~? Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia
vADiW~^Q^ Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD
iwotEl0*{ Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
l/&.H F n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne,
0!T`.UMI Victoria 3002, Australia. Email:
cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au fpD$%.y'J 78 McCarty et al.
=p+y$ Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural
&
{}Mds Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural
i%hCV o residents. A household census was conducted to identify
=V^-@ji)b eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a
c3$T3Lu1 resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of
LeKovt% the household census, basic information about age, sex,
2KlQ[z4Ir country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of
(_T{Z>C/J
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected.
*'%V}R[> Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local
]&cnc8tC examination site for a more detailed interview and examination.
P@{x@9kI The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian
i0vm0
0oT Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee.
c{z$^)A/ Assessment of cataract
B,%Vy!o A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after
RB 5SK#z pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine
j[>cv;h
; hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the
|=?#Xbxz time of the examination and subsequently from photos using
iUx\3d, the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and
mk-{@$Q Jb posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on
__=H"UhWv retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16)
RBX<>* of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis,
i5,iJe0cA cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity,
| f#wbw PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than
v}B%:1P4 1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to
!`DRJ)h or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual
ll:UIxx acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical,
Sj9fq* nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1.
"M I';6 Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to
_(W@FS intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the
-yqsJGY analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight
B9v>="F cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the
JF~i.+{h analyses.
Bo 35L:r| A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp.,
7)66e Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in
ho]:)!|VY height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations.
ua\t5M5 Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman
sZ;|NAx) Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph
.sMs_ 5D the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were
kfy!T rf photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera
Z;0~f<e%
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400
c9(3z0!F? film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately
-<iP$,bq72 by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated
6j#JhcS+ by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies
Z6
!
Up1 between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were
=c8}^3L~7 resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing,
J<)qw the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph
3Ax'v|&Hg grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical
((y|?
Z$ cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%)
[Nyt0l "z for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to
kZ]H[\Fs the severity of the opacity in the worse eye.
xtV+Le% Assessment of risk factors
+UzQJt/>> A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information
SV7;B?e%Y about education, employment and ethnic background.11
[%W'd9`> Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration
<-lM9}vd and treatment of a number of medical conditions,
I-#H+\S including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension
UG| /Px ] and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and
5
Qgu:)} duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were
dFg>uo collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to
HC`0Ni1 determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants
u{1R=ML and use of vitamin supplements.
-4Qub{Uym Data management and statistical analysis
>P6"-x,[" Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a
dQ:,pe7A questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation,
[8V;Q Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or
ULx:2jz on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at
VQ= a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms
8$FH;= were entered into a computer with double data entry and
nz 10/nw reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency
iFIGJS checks were performed on the entire data set.
=vThtl/azD SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was
Ku5||u.F4* employed for statistical analyses.
]4~Yi1] Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific
7H
H rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to
zCs34=3D[ account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five
dCx63rF`G per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates
e=]SIR()` were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific
tFU4%c7V data were weighted according to the 1996
EKc<|e,F Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the
"&L8d(ZuA cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population.
VH7t^fb Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared
Ir;JYY!0? tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated
A%w9Da?B cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted
s,R:D). into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the
=OufafZb Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract.
M+"6VtZH final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically
<ZT
C^=3 significant. Design effect was assessed through the use
q<AnWNheE of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The
[^!SkQ design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment
!~
o%KQt made in the variance by adding the variance associated with
2V~E
<K- the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence
/gAT@
Vx limits.
b'wy{~l@ RESULTS
Bzz|2/1y Study population
F .S^KK A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403
j"Jf|Hq $ (90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%)
|q3X#s72 rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did
qV=:2m10x not differ from participants.16 The study population was
Jp jHbG representative of the Victorian population and Australia as
loA/d a whole.
#7;?Ls The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to
\Zf=A[ 98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The
l8~(bq1 Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to
A%#M#hD/ 101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural
EIw]
9;'_ residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60)
B=KrJ{&! and 701 (47.5%) were men.
}NDl~5 Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery
3$hIc) As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases
y`9#zYgqA dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any
fXWy9 #M cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9).
MK3h~`is Although the rates varied somewhat between the three
;PaU"z+Je~ strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence
OROvy limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes
?Uq"zq with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5%
.B~}hjOZK (65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract
0
s+X:*C~ (97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract
N3$1f$` surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall
3qTr|8`s weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was
z~2{`pET 3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2).
XaCvBQ Risk factors for unoperated cataract
5Pf=Uj6D Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified
2|x
!~e. as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated
\v&zsv\B@ cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents
pO *[~yq5 as information about risk factor exposure was not
aX1b(h2 available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed
7j)ky2r#
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence
Xfg3q.q (urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic
n
UmyPQ~ integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a
$B8Vg `+ measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use
eP"B3Jw of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private
dwk%!% health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use,
i.'"`pn_ glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status.
O*v&CHd3 In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the
^'[QCwY~ level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having
HnArj_E cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract
?o[h$7`o6 surgery were not available.
F%<*a
,m6g The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate
ATqblU>D analyses were related to: whether a participant had
@\nQ{\^; ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been
A
:ts_* diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment
Mv%Qze,\V^ status (currently employed) and age. These significant
sJx_X8 factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression
zHA::6OgPN model. The factors that remained significantly related
Hrpz4E%\Aw to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever
v4hrS\M seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been
&V1d"";SZ diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors
}x
C2~
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate
Uk] jy>7;! model.
xI{fd1 The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract
.iy>N/u who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with
UstUPO Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79
K
-:y Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort
!b_(|~7Lc Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total
F/ZFO5C% (years) (%) (%) (%)
jUM'f24 40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08)
Mq<ob+ Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10)
?Fx~_GT 50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15)
g
ptf*^s Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24)
T`wDdqWbEG 60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0)
O
Ol: Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7)
>)<? 70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1)
0zNbux_ Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9)
T='uqKW\ 80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3)
2j8GJU/L Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8)
aGC3&c[Wx 90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0)
%Zk6K!MY# Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0)
U.,S.WP+d Age-standardized
_cQ
'3@ (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)
f2x!cL|Kx? aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2
xx!8cvD4? their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27%
^%,{R},s
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared,
fYjmG[4 1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62).
`;Tf _6c Outcomes of cataract surgery
|&8XmexLb Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior
+o`%7r(R cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were
RJ@79L*# left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular
73rme, lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular
4&cQW) lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact
;Va(l$zD posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of
r%f Q$q> eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected
?pZU'5le` visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43%
)iw-l~y; of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes
buX(mj:& (11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21,
cxs@ph&Wk P = 0.027).
%TQ4ZFD3 The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity
V8 8u- of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without
d.+ cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract
X1(ds*'Kv and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared,
(G>su 2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the
P}8hK operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18
e#Ao]gc (moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this
a%Q`R;W moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four
>u>
E !5O (15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these
+h"i6`g four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction
K>+ v" x and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one
Hj>9 #>b had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract
@`KbzN_h/ surgery.
&m