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 %2{ %Obp'  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes 7 *`h/  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to (Hb:?(  
unoperated cataract in Australia. FWG6uKv  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual !u[eaLxV  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than r\-uJ~8N  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination |8l<$J  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography m4hg'<<V  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who b)qoh^  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater ':3 pq2{  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or jN;@=COi  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. DpvI[r//'*  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne c]n1':FT"  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 2q=AEv/  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria bB1UZ O  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract NflD/q/ L  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had x7!L{(E3  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 ( u\._Gwsx  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber ;Q OBBF3HG  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber -$cmG4  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated !Sh&3uy_qN  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or Bn#?zI  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven ORHp$Un~)  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate "4+ &-ms  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery @s ?  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% hKLCJ#T  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone 2Mc3|T4)U  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an Zw 5Ni Xj  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision Z<1FSk,[  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no v &Yi  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural A+ZK4]xb  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance ([T>.s  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated m? J0i>H  
cataract. u~7hWiY<2  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is I7|Pi[e  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced ZkRx1S"m  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of J%v=yBC2  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes qT{U(  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. n$x c];j  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health ov ` h  
services accessibility, prevalence &=Ar  
INTRODUCTION bH7X'%r  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in bf ]f= ;.+  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all QUq_:t+Dv  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate Zd^rNHhA  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be H*RC@O_hv  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 zT =Ho   
Although there have been a number of studies reporting ]fx"4qKM  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is >BIMi^  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in [-65PC4aN  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists s:>Va GC  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather YIn',]p:  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral yzbx .  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has +X#vVD3"  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for _X^1IaL  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has 63q^ $I  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 9Tg IB  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is CY 4gSe?  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the w j*,U~syB  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract <{dVKf,e  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence 4,bv)Im+ `  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors p#ol*m5wE  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to mC4zactv  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. S@jQX  
METHODS ^!<U_;+  
Study population s [M?as  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual fV &KM*W*@  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 #zG&|<hc  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to \kp8S'qVo  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. c& r70L,  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of (n*^4@"2  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen zcel|oz)  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites q$ZHd  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. 3p3 9`"~  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 q4R5<LW"  
Original Article whmdcVh.  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia b=g8eMm  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD 8qY79)vD4E  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia vL|SY_:4  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, )T/0S$@  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au R{WE\T'  
78 McCarty et al. C\3y {s  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural c2h{6;bfY  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural M2HomO/X)  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify $h5xH9x ;  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a a;rdQ>  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of W0y '5`  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, I, -hf=-  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of ;Yx)tWQI  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. &%8'8,.  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local :H7D ~ n  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. ks3`3q 7  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian &+a9+y  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. k'gh  
Assessment of cataract Ao&\EcIOT  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after 3 ;)>Fs;  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine @AK n@T5  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the NS9B[*"Jl  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using 3Vsc 9B"w  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and sSOOXdnGG  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on l/BLUl~z  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) b^ L \>3  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, $ .C=H[QC  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, BS /G("oZ[  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than \[BK1J P  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to h "Xg;(K  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual _6_IP0;  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, p%iGc<vHX  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. v$~QU{ &  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to 2]I4M[|&z  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the 8j Mk )-  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight P6E3-?4j  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the <!L>Exh&r  
analyses. k xP-,MD  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., (H)2s Y  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in wkP#Z"A0~  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. >QA uEM  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman Ae mDJ8Y  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph "nZ*{uv  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were ) u3 Zm  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera aJYgzr,  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 n_$ :7J  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately umD!2 w  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated :/ y1yM  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies 9U{a{~b  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were Fkvl%n  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, LAVAFlK5  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph 6;C3RU]  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical 1v,Us5s<"6  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) 7#@cz5Su  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to cj+ FRG~u  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. EG0WoUX|  
Assessment of risk factors $SM# < @  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information )_{dWf1  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 A6GE,FhsG  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration M(jgd  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, Wi[~fI8^!  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension ~2<7ZtV=  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and SxdE?uCUS  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were lrnyk(M}Q.  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to U"q/rcA  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants b`)){LR  
and use of vitamin supplements. an4GSL  
Data management and statistical analysis =:DaS`~V  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a {LX.iH 9}l  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, ]?3un!o3o  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or e_s&L,ze  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at Vnx,5E&  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms RQ'exc2x0  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and `kbSu}  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency NG  
checks were performed on the entire data set. a;QMA d!  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was (4'$y`Z  
employed for statistical analyses. A;/-u<f  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific zunV<2~(2}  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to x%+aKZ(m)  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five 2WtRJi?b|  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates "*LD 3  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific 8>X d2X  
data were weighted according to the 1996 2 Yp7  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the h3*Zfl<]  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. @;<ht c  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared DA2}{  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated @O@GRq&V  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted +n<k)E@>J  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the pGf@z:^{*-  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. " R-!(9k^`  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically ]UH`Pdlt  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use P( XaTU&-  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The (9<guv  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment K4]g[z  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with _U{zMVr  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence N\HQN0d9  
limits. 4O;OjUI0a  
RESULTS ~mO62(8m  
Study population U5-@2YcH  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 J|X 6j&-  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) ~v'3"k6  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did }|5 V RJA  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was jS+AGE?5e  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as {X[ HCfJd  
a whole. Qt,M!i,  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to C_4)=#@GU  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The 3/b;7\M  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to WdZ:K,  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural \mw(cM#:  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) 59zENUYl  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. @#P,d5^G  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery {5d9$v7k4  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases hUD7_arKF  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any b:R-mg.VT{  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). f)g7 3=  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three 0vVV%,v  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence f8SL3+v  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes xB@|LtdO9;  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% uP<0WCN  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract  HLBkR>e  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract  f>s?4  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall $t5 V=}m>  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was  .AYj'Y  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). F  q!fWl  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract ?6nF~9Z'  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified $5v0m#[^  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated Qj3a_p$)P  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents <BO)E(  
as information about risk factor exposure was not 1Nu1BLPm  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed gORJWQv  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence ]r3Kg12Mi  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic V97,1`  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a mKT>,M  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use 2kv7UU#q2  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private  PlYm&  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, l c_E!"1  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. lpRR&  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the 6YuY|JD  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having T~fmk f$  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract []0mX70N  
surgery were not available. }|B=h  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate +fx8mu z:y  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had Fkf97O i  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been N)S!7%ne  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment 0wFH!s/B  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant kz"3ZDR  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression oo=#XZkk  
model. The factors that remained significantly related Gn)y> AN  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever '!P"xBVAu  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been mR8W]'gl.L  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors BZb]SoAL  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate !GW ,\y  
model. r-kMLw/)  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract CC;! <km  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with F?m?UQS'u  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 VD4C::J  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort y<XlRTy[}  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total Y${l!+q  
(years) (%) (%) (%) }j1!j&&  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) =2y8 CgLj  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) F8e<}v&7R  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) -ng=l;  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) >x3ug]Bu  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) 7&O`p(j  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) %~j2 ('Y  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) Ufo>|A 6;$  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) 1\dn 1Hh  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) yB LUNIr  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) +:6Ii9G N  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) rZ_>`}O2  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) 5)zn:$cz  
Age-standardized +VEU:1Gt  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) R.j1?\  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 ?p[O%_Xf  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% [O-sVYB  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, ,]Zp+>{  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). |0bc$ZY:  
Outcomes of cataract surgery |!d"*.Q@F  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior tPHS98y  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were *!:QdWLq  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular 7Tf]:4Y"  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular TTI81:fku  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact i}TwOy<4s  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of )_jSG5k  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected =lr)gj  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% -ewQp9)G  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes S+x_c4 T  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, [JTto!Ih$  
P = 0.027). Uhh l3%p  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity ^9"KTZc-*  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without Mxz,wfaH>  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract n l/UdgI  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, xc'vS>&  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the y@ vj;3:  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18  v%{0 Tyk  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this +p:Y=>bTj  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four LhJa)jFQ  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these utO.WfWP  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction gb-{2p>}  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one XYbyOM VI  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract :.IN?X  
surgery. hCc0sRp  
DISCUSSION /NBTvTI  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically 4L:>4X[T  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract z?.(3oLT  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes )&1!xF   
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual ]EL\)xCr  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and -Wjh**  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is sB7" 0M  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, y$oW!  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract 6M><(1fT  
services throughout Australia. Lar r}o=  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age >BiRk%x  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is >A jCl  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous y lL8+7W  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye pC^[[5A  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract v}`1)BUeF  
between studies because of different methodologies and O~'FR[J  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well !t-K<'  
as the different age structures of the study populations. :EB,{|m  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of %,?vyY  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. ZgF/;8!~V-  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity V*qY"[   
has not been included in the definition of cataract. _Y#Bm/*  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the ;X7i/D Q  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. HDj$"pS  
80 McCarty et al. on5 0+)uN  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort zPBfiK_hV  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total DB8s  
(years) (%) (%) (%) UPO^V:.R4  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) 5B|,S1b  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( u\5g3BH  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) {G.jB/  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) ^srs$ w]  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) '>]&rb09|  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) uQ1jwYK`7  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) X 7&U3v  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) K P6PQgc  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) Q 3X  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) &CO| Y(+  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) Z"N(=B  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) &%:*\_2s  
Age-standardized 25&n wz  
(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) fO+U HSC  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract u#!GMZJN  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. 8>d q=0:  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 '2xcce#  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the 8E 9{ Gf  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude )O -cw7 >  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the nHVPMi>  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). OsB?1;:  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains K+-zY[3  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban {YBl:r Mz  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than uYabJqV  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, K7S754m  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in ,b4~!V  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, XUf7yD  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens W1;=J^<&1  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. =!YP$hfY  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable eL_^: -   
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, "B~WcC  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that 4*H(sq  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and G~`'E&/  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is % kJh6J  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted {dZ!I  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement L%k67>  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We @|E;}:?u  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction ~K_]N/ >  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have CH55K[{<  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this /G{&[X<4U  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their 5"$e=y/  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants 48H5_9>:  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the 3>H2xh3Y  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ j/~VP2R`  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their "k/;`eAP  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to W;q#ZD(;  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change i[o&z$JO  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function /4(Z`e;0  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in }!eF  
overall quality of life.22 Nz3zsP$  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually -hQ96S8  
significant posterior capsule opacification following G~JC gi  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% j~X j  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated LQ~LB'L  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear & 8ccrw  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an 0@o;|N"i  
opaque capsule. H<v c\r  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and ]lymY _ >  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, :yd=No@  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We 3s3 a>  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more I[tAT[ <  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is Tbe_x s^  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 cjCE3V9X  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any [6Uudiw  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of ;5&k/CB1  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care Wpiv1GZ%c8  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without L#@l(8.  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the j4.Qvj >:4  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated <1ztj#B  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. 34"{rMbQ  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem 4U}.Skzq  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract c.|sW2/  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will ^G ]KE8  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the ek Y?  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in $K=K?BV[  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well /ig^7+#  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes k@'?"CP\Xq  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. &6|6J1c8  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract *Y| lO  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for V Z4nAG  
cataract extractions increases. {|8:U}<#h  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS X=S}WKu  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants ZwY`x')  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the Y/?DSo4G  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell e#76h;  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and "6|'& 6&  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient Jgi{7J  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal cOj +}Hz58  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. 0C4* F  
REFERENCES [A.eVuV;+  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. QjW~6Z.tI  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. }RC. Q`b  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, V!yp@%D  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population #/& q  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. _zVbqRHlw  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens r`mzsO-'  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated IArpCF/"8  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. 6 ^6uK  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related B<|q{D$N/  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. @eG#%6">  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. H7cRWB  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye \a~;8):q=i  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population Q>+_W2~]  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: ej??j<]  
363–71. n=#[Mi $Y  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. @/ovdf{  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye QtO[g   
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. }!J/ 9WKgU  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. w-q=.RSTn=  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient X  f'  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. )9;kzp/  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. z<C~DH  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated k?@W/}Iv9  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. aX%g+6t2  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. 5D q{"@E  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too _ jM6ej<  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal RAXJsF^5o  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: _ZvX"{ y~  
77–80. 9DocId.  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice }e;p8)]Wl  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? 70 D Q/b  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. )-6[ Bw  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest #IciNCIrG  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye _ d"Y6 0  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic 7[VCCI g  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. ^gVbVz[17  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading v+, w{~7RH  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. {~ vPq  
82 McCarty et al. @x\gk5  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & }N=zn7W  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. E"vi+'(v  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume m_Y}>  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International Ffqn|} gb  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. 'Y/V9;`)s  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and $[9V'K  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. Ay. q)  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison @;-Un/'C;7  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased >Sl:Z ,g;  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment y#SD-# I-  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. @ F"ShT0  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the !N2 n@bo  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health (inwKRH  
Organization, 1997. gl4 f9Ff  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, ~<Qxw>S#  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation !h aXO  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. "g&l~N1$  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. uaMm iR  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of vVR CM  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative J};,%q_  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. T%xL=STJNy  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. bSKV|z/x  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated <. ]&FPJ  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. <i @jD  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. [IX!3I[J]  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract &_TjRj"  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and M(gWd8?#  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. =*G'.D /*  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. o%s}jBo}  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to 6aK2 {-+  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. 'cCj@bZ9X  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. m|?J^_  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A T[II;[EiE  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule <J uJ`t  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. YuuG:Kk  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. y^ fU_L?p  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health yM~D.D3H  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. gDBQ\vM8  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in + {dIs  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, YR`rg;n#  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract  K8we*  
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:
免费考博论坛网址是什么? 正确答案:freekaobo.com
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交