加入VIP 上传考博资料 您的流量 增加流量 考博报班 每日签到
   
主题 : Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia
级别: 禁止发言
显示用户信息 
楼主  发表于: 2009-06-05   

Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia

ABSTRACT 6GAEQ]  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes VSO(DCr"L  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to Bs3&y Eq(  
unoperated cataract in Australia. xGOmvn^lQ  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual OtAAzc!dQ  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than BSkmFd(*  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination v\(6uej^  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography q+qF;7dN@  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who v"Bm4+c&0  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater uu-M7>+  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or uQ ]ZMc  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. ~mHrgx Q-  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne N:KM8PZ&~  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 w$]wd`N}  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria 1 "t9x.  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract mxH63$R  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had )`<&~>qp  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 D0_CDdW%7  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber non5e)w3@  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber 2.{zf r  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated 7#&Q-3\:  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or 4F -<j!  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven UZ-pN_!Z:  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate H7drDw  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery hZ|0<u  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% =~ ,2E;#X  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone 2#qc YU  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an #l*w=D?  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision all2?neK  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no J }bLp Z  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural %ol1WG9  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance Oku7&L1  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated Q7zpu/5?  
cataract. _K!)0p  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is z X+i2,  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced gL@]p  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of y\9#"=+  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes 4kK_S.&  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. ^%\MOjSN  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health &- My[t  
services accessibility, prevalence A^|~>9  
INTRODUCTION =<TJ[,h et  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in f"4w@X2F  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all _$8:\[J  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate ra@CouR^c{  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be `0+-:sXZ6  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 pUu<0a^  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting w)R5@ @C*  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is g">^#^hBE  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in YPKB4p#  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists ,nV4%Aa  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather 9.9B#?  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral %z~kHL  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has uA t{WDHm  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for e)XnS'  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has ;R@D  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 U+[ "b-c  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is eq<!  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the yGV>22vv M  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract b9v<Jk  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence v}IhO~`uEq  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors V:+z3)qF  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to Pl2eDv-y  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. y(^\]-fE  
METHODS eYu0")  
Study population YJ~mcaw  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual !*?9n ^PaF  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 N8J(RR9O  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to y3PrLBTz  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. B`jq"[w]-  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of ki1j~q  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen 9^nRwo  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites 7QoMroR  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. Bx5kqHp^1  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 ]M'~uTf  
Original Article ]I zD`  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia V\l@_%D[(v  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD - leYR`P  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia  Q7tvpU  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, qOnGP{   
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au ?zbWz=nq  
78 McCarty et al. .*.eY?,V  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural !+QfQghAT  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural qV/>d' ,  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify Z_ Y'#5o#  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a PrA(==FX/  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of evNe6J3  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, /H3w7QU   
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of j2.7b1s  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. ,LxkdV  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local bX` Gv+  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. y\Utm$)j  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian r9L--#=z  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. PL 3hrI 5  
Assessment of cataract ^H{YLO  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after =9,^Tu|  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine a(ITv roM/  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the 2gMG7%d  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using <V Rb   
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and =6"5kz10  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on zNdkwj p+  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) (Cfb8\~  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, ela^L_NhF  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, "k{so',7z  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than :Jv5Flxl  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to o[i N/  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual js@L%1r#L  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, 79exZ7|  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. 8T6N G!/  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to $~W5! m  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the #kq!{5,  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight 3}F>t{FDk  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the zyUS$g]&  
analyses. 6=;(~k&x9:  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., H"6x/&s.=k  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in G8klW ZAJ  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. 'wG1un;t  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman "QxULiw  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph C&MqH.K  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were Z?!AJY  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera VN!nef  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 Ui`{U  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately ~uty<fP  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated HbsNF~;  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies )`f-qTe  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were >19s:+  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, "8ellKh  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph n9}BT^4 v  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical _#:7S sJ  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) p TwzVz~  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to BO w[*hM  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. 9$ ;5J  
Assessment of risk factors sIg TSdk  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information T :X*  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 `@],J  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration otR7E+*3  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, [07E-TT2U  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension M?" 4 {  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and z}u`45W+  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were ISs&1`Y  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to  t8EI"|  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants S W%>8  
and use of vitamin supplements. D!,5j_,j%  
Data management and statistical analysis Q:megU'u  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a I!*P' {lh  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, ]A%3\)r  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or fGlvum  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at mB_?N $K  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms Et N,  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and a~0 ~Y y  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency %u66H2  
checks were performed on the entire data set. M> WWP3  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was q=5aHH% |  
employed for statistical analyses. @e3+Gs  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific *mp:#'  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to 3Ji zv ,?  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five &@oI/i&0B  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates q@bye4Ry%W  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific 6I"KomJ9  
data were weighted according to the 1996 / e>%yq<9B  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the >o1dc*  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. $TXiWW+  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared g ,JfT^  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated qo3+=*"V  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted pV ^+X}  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the M@{?#MkS%  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. ZcXAqep8'  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically H^n@9U;[K  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use .S 54:vs  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The 2(DhKHrF  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment 8C*@d_=q  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with bfz7t!A)A  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence C7{VByxJ  
limits. 9$HKP9 G  
RESULTS 4u}Cki,vOK  
Study population >b2!&dm  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 ]`$yY5&W0  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) 5wVJ.B~s  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did jXA/G%:[  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was *`+zf7-f  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as O+o)z6(  
a whole. Y ]()v  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to 9DA |;|  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The y-+W  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to myfTz tJ  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural c0Ih$z  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) bI ;I<Qa  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. i24k ]F  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery `r SOt *<  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases VrRF2(Kn?  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any n{TWdC  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). oH=?1~ e  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three .*` ^dt  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence "e"#k}z9  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes U 2YY   
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% J*rYw5QB  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract l jK?2z>  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract 5?$MZaT  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall v)O0i2  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was E$ \l57  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). #@DJf  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract !nl-}P,  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified ~NIhS!  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated +TqrvI.  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents TXi|  
as information about risk factor exposure was not s\mA3t  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed t4UK~ {gh  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence }o:LwxNO  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic "T=j\/Q  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a ({rcH.:  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use `l]Lvk8O  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private M#4;y,n<k  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, X8m-5(uW  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. GkU_01C  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the ~v(c9I)  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having 05H:ZrUV  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract (!fx5&F  
surgery were not available. -}<Ru)  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate ,Gv}N&  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had "=DQ {(L  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been 1f+A_k/@  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment ng+sK  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant .b_ppieNY  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression YZfi-35@g  
model. The factors that remained significantly related =b*GV6b  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever T P#Ncqh  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been =LLpJ+  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors ~.x#ic  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate (pCHj'  
model. Sydl[c pH$  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract {f/]K GGk  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with axmq/8X  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 `#iL'ND[  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort Ju#j% !  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total [ p,]/ ^ N  
(years) (%) (%) (%) 1d+Kn Jy  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) >y8>OJ?A7-  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) e=h-}XRC  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) -cUbIbW  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) >|Ro LV  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) &V 7J5~_  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) JcYY*p  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) h{"SV*Xpk/  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) W2-l_{  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) v(Kj6 '  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) Ndl{f=sjX-  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) vG6*[c8  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) ,#BD/dF  
Age-standardized "4xo,JUf  
(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) =/j!S|P  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 4E=QO!pVv  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% dY. X/f  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, 0VQBm^$(  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). Zc38ht\r;  
Outcomes of cataract surgery j*gZvbO;'L  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior ^& * ;]S`  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were "D>/#cY1/  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular QsPg4y3?D  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular -4Dz9 8du  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact +68age;dM  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of ^GYVRD  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected J"h2"$v,  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% 1Hhr6T^)  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes IC"ktv bHz  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, Ui"$A/  
P = 0.027). ^^ SMr l  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity IDF0nx]  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without ~ m vv :u  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract 'S74Ys=-0  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, K5bR7f:  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the "WmsBdO  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 .L^j:2(L  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this xh<{lZ)KJ  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four n]3'N58  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these c*axw%Us  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction u f<%!=e  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one 3qu?q D  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract @@R&OR  
surgery. fTX|vy<EMI  
DISCUSSION YsiH=x  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically J?t(TW6E   
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract F3q<j$y  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes v^t oe  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual )B-[Q#*A-  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and Z3Ww@&bU  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is l.;^w  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, m4~~q[t  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract Kn?h  
services throughout Australia. Y)(w&E>1  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age }a UQ#x  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is 7FaF]G  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous !)J$f _88D  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye NYxL7:9  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract <?;KF2A({  
between studies because of different methodologies and !-SI &qy  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well _x$Eq: i  
as the different age structures of the study populations. l8%B RG  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of a>Aq/=  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. .UN?Ak*R  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity FKf2Q&2I  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. 3RlNEc%)  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the WkpHe  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. 931GJA~g  
80 McCarty et al. ~Kt +j  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort Q!AGalP z  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total |1(L~g  
(years) (%) (%) (%) _3g!_  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) t="nmjQs  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( AOqL&z  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) Z% `$id  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) -0k{O@l"  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) UQb|J9HY4  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) 4 4WyfpTJ*  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) E;k$ICOXA  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) :[C|3KKe"  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) B\ZCJaMb  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) vZqW,GDfXo  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) -2C^M> HZ  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) v>j<ky   
Age-standardized !bX   
(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) yZmeke)_  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract *m'&<pg]X  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. QZL,zI]LL  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 M@pF[J/  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the 3]&le[.  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude <#./q LSR  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the $/E{3aT@F2  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). NR^3 1&}It  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains I3ugBLxVC3  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban _Qb ].~  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than ++|e z{  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, )~w bu2;  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in qE6D"+1y7  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, W$gjcsv  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens sv!6z Js  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. rF/<}ye/4M  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable ciCQe]fS  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, 5E${  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that 2Fbg"de3-  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and oSO~ 72  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is @[TSJ i  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted 0.U- tg0  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement iW[%|ddk  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We ?nM]eUAP  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction WvcPOt8Bp>  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have }e>OmfxDBt  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this }%3i8e  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their T >5N$i  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants ;F /w&u.n  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the aOmQ<N]a  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ oe=W}y_k  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their 22EI`}"J  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to l~x 6R~q  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change \"+}-!wr  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function <07~EP  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in KP gzB^>  
overall quality of life.22 <t,lq  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually Lv-M.  
significant posterior capsule opacification following M"ZeK4qh  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% 8@KGc )k  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated YcM 0A~<  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear R1Q~UX]d=  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an =^w:G=ymS  
opaque capsule. )yS S2  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and i(S}gH4*o  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, TcH7!fUj  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We ,'@t .XP  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more &hIr@Gi@ch  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is _Hv@bIL'  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 S\6.vw!'  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any T{lK$j  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of ]mx1djNA  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care Yo,n#<37  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without E<tJ8&IGk  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the i5czm?x  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated 3mo Du  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. ,BlNj^ 5f  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem ^x}k1F3  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract sE\Cv2Gx  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will q)y<\cEO  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the y2>AbrJ  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in gLWbd~  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well {0\9HI@  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes 1-8 G2e  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. ,xy$h }g  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract qyR}|<F8*  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for KKNQ+'?  
cataract extractions increases. luCwP  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS c{})Z=  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants `~2I  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the 6rN.)dL.#N  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell Ypx"<CKP}  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and =8Gpov1!V~  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient '_ FxxLAO  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal 0uJ??4N9  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. l|K$6>80  
REFERENCES >yqFO  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. Xt$Y&Ho  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. N)  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, af}JS2=$  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population Dh)(?"^9A  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. O+ xzM[[  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens )Qh*@=$-  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated ? w@)3Z=u  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. P}"uC `036  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related Y {|is2M9'  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study.  !x EGN@  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. OZQN&7  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye ;e6- *  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population Pdk#"H-j  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: ` pfRY!  
363–71. ^CP>|JWD^  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. R _Z 9 aQ  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye Fmzkbt~oe  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. 'CCAuN>J  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. L#\5)mO.v  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient )Kq@ m1>@  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. I6 PReVIb  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. "b\@.7".  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated :}-izd)/j  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. $.zd,}l@L  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. 8LUl@!4b  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too  7MQxW<0  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal Av!xI  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: EF'8-*  
77–80. /ACau<U]t  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice -?NAA]P5c@  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? 5-UrHbpCZ#  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. lLLPvW[Q  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest gi$'x^]#  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye $Ww.^ym  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic oj@=Cq':-  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. S84S/y  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading u-*z#e_L0  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. .9vt<<Kwh  
82 McCarty et al. 3rX 40>Cs8  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & M"6J"s  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. ua,!kyS  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume 25<qo{  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International h=^UMat-  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. MHJRBn{}  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and V=8npz   
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. ?} lqu7S  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison yT[=!M  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased 1\nzfxx   
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment zx@L sp  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. Rln\  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the }$LnjwM;,  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health ^tIYr <I  
Organization, 1997. )TEod!]  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, Y^y:N$3$\  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation <C451+95  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. 7spZe"  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. &MPlSIg  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of Uyxn+j 5  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative J P^\   
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. AQ,"):ofvT  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. mP's4  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated `?SC.KT  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. "=LeHY=9  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31.  {rn^  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract q$ "?P  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and 5K-,k^T}  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. $wDSED -  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. F{rC{5@fj  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to v6Wz:|G/u  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. i0*Cs#(=h  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. J #jFX F\  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A Y0J:c? ,  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule btC6R>0   
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. C6h[L  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. {u -J?(s}  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health b80&${v  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. ov daK"q2  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in 2%J] })  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, f6nuh&!-  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract o*2Mjd]r  
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:
免费考博网网址是什么? 正确答案:freekaobo.com
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交