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: 2009-06-04   

Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia

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 Kejp7 okb  
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/&.HF  
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 RB5SK#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-{@$QJb  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on __=H"UhWv  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) RBX<>*  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, i5,iJe0cA  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, | f#wbw  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than v}B%:1P4  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to !`DRJ)h  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual ll:UIxx  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, Sj9fq*  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. "M I';6  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to _( W@FS  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the -yqsJGY  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight B9v>="F  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the JF~i.+{ h  
analyses. Bo 35L:r|  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., 7)66e  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in ho]:)!|VY  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. ua\t5M5  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman sZ;|NAx)  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph .sMs_ 5D  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were kfy!T rf  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera Z;0~f<e%  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 c9(3z0!F ?  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately -<iP$,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=3 D[  
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 t FU4%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=Kr J{&!  
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 a X1b(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&C Hd3  
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). %TQ4 ZFD3  
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. &mN]U<N  
DISCUSSION \;Q(o$5<  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically 8J'5%$3u  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract kEq~M10  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes :epBd3f  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual >I@&"&d  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and d [l8qaD  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is _'cB<9P  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, Zuzwc[Z1  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract 3y.+03 W  
services throughout Australia. ,|RKM  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age gH(#<f@ZI  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is {D8opepO)  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous #@ HlnF}T  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye $Mg O)bH  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract bMc[0  
between studies because of different methodologies and q'S[TFMNE  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well /F.<Gz;w  
as the different age structures of the study populations. FFZ?-sE  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of >uZc#Zt  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. ?a,#p  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity ^/?7hbr  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. vW.f`J,\D'  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the \1<aBgK i  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. F6 ~ ;f;  
80 McCarty et al. ^(  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort c86?-u')  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total F/J s K&&  
(years) (%) (%) (%) a\m=E#G  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) nnhI]#,a{  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( yqx!{8=V  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) O D5qPovsd  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) }#.OJub  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) p/0dtnXa(  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) T] H 'l  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) n'vdA !R  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) T*B`8P  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) 19R~&E's  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) b"o\-iUioe  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) XjzGtZ#6  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8)  IN6L2/Q  
Age-standardized (5`(H.(  
(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) ;xh.95BP`  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract 8@;R2]Q  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. oJ5n*[qUI  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 lhE]KdE3  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the f[NxqNn  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude Q>X1 :Zn3  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the I^LU*A=  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). 3LQ u+EsS  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains Xeja\5zB  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban , DuyPBAms  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than 3&[d.,/  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, +Y+fM  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in U7zd7 O  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, v8\_6}*I  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens oKkDG|IE  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. FS)C<T]t  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable  N6\m*j,`  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, B;iJ$gt]  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that Sd I>  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and FD~uUZTM  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is _Nz?fJ:$@  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted `]6W*^'PD  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement 9O&MsTmg$  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We 6m(+X M S  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction #="Lr4T  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have 4e[ 0.2?  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this w2!5TKZ`  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their 8v^AVg  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants ?56;<%0  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the p)Ht =~  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ Lnh'y`q  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their zLS?: yq  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to rc{F17~vX  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change rUB67ok*  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function /T&+vzCF  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in S6yLq|W0  
overall quality of life.22 WR* <|  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually R|O^7o  
significant posterior capsule opacification following gHvkr?Cg  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% do< N+iK  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated S: g 2V  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear !1+!;R@&H>  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an :7qJ[k{g  
opaque capsule. *U,W4>(B  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and y 0fI7:e3  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, gEq";B%?  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We >ufN[ab  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more N?s5h?  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is `=W#owAF  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 S#ud<=@!9  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any n]_<6{: U  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of Ot!*,%sjQ  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care +d8?=LX  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without 7/c9azmC  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the .t%` "C  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated 3)~z~p7  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. 9D& 22hL4  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem Si[xyG6=  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract hjoxx F\_  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will dO[pm0  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the _s NJU  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in @arMg2"o  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well ?pp|~A)b  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes k3B]u.Lo  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. zlN<yZB^  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract #-FfyxQ8ai  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for JdA3O{mT)  
cataract extractions increases. ef(OhIX  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iN@+,]Yjl  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants ' +[fJ>Le  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the Mhj.3nN  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell oSqkAAGz\  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and b!-F!Lq/+0  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient O'<cEv'B*  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal {nlqQ.jO  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. niP/i  
REFERENCES aJ}Cq k  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. cv  /  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. 75t5:>"[  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, ZQPv@6+oY  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population v %fRq!~  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. /6@Wm? `DB  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens 8g CQ0w<  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated A~UDtXN*4  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. $Sfx0?'  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related %.*?i9}  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. ;\Vi~2!8  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. ;/phZ$l  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye E _DSf  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population $5)ZaYx<  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: g0BJj=  
363–71. \f7A j>  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. $' 2yPoR  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye dkRG4 )~g  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. ` E2@GX+,  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. ua]>0\D  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient -gpF%g`H  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. .w`1;o  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. . !|3a  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated $m;rOKVU  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. !?7c2QRN  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. 6(`Bl$M9  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too 7]~65@%R-&  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal qd FYf/y  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: fQ^45u lz  
77–80. :u7y k@  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice 6-@ X  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? prC1<rm  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. CR-6}T   
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest D e>'  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye xJ|3}o:,  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic hYS*J908  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. o1"MW>B,4  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading cj:!uhZp7  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. *jps}uk<  
82 McCarty et al. R~ $W  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & l0m\2Ttf  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. "YUyM5X  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume HrUQ X4  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International .cTK\  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. 6O^'J~wiI  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and S?W!bkfn  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. Gu-*@C:^&  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison QPf#y7_@u  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased K0#kW \4`  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment 'Jb6CR n  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. %=:*yf>}  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the %E 95R8SL  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health l^s\^b=W  
Organization, 1997. ps#+i  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, "#4p#dM0e  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation u.wm;e K[  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. a}Db9=  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. %ec9`0^4S  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of S~QL x  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative ]&za^%q0&  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. U2*g9Es  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. ?=:wIMV  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated "T/ vE  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. pu(a&0  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. i<N[sO  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract (R _#lRaQ  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and 6&p I{  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. K-&&%Id6R  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. M+<xX)   
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to @V/Lqia  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. -2}-;|  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. {Mc^[}9  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A SF.4["$  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule ~f&lQN'1  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. {EKzPr/  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. 60KhwD1  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health FgILQ"+  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. 74VN3m  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in T:ye2yg  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, S/}6AX#F4  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract +{V"a<D$m  
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