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 "'DPb%o  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes AIP0PJI3  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to =?CIC%6m  
unoperated cataract in Australia. )E",)}Nh  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual WDnNVE  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than rE "FN~9P  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination ]Y,V)41gCE  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography yu#m6K  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who K z^.v`  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater A/zAB3  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or 5bZ0}^FYF  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. rxx VLW  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne r{~b4~kAf5  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 jz3f{~   
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria pl}W|kW}  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract P/S,dhs(  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had 6=%\@  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 UN<$F yb  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber _+}o/449  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber !FK)iQy$0  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated E?&YcVA  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or Nn0j}ZI)1  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven = g%<xCp  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate AO-~dV  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery 9qq6P!  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% =BD |uIR  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone (Ms0pm-#t  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an IUWJi\,  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision 5IgO4<B  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no ocS}4.a@  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural \+ Es e-la  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance .5~3D97X&  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated Lm^vS u  
cataract. "-HWw?rx/  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is p`"Ic2xPJ  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced IUG}Q7w5  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of *\0h^^|@  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes "?_ af  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. Tj2pEOu  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health a!j{A?7Kw.  
services accessibility, prevalence p CeCR  
INTRODUCTION X4k|k>  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in YvUV9qps~  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all Q}^qu6  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate FbCuXS=+`  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be 7 $dibTER  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 e\ZV^h}TQ  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting Gfep m$*%  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is a3[,3  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in us U6,  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists iML?`%/vN  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather B?d+^sz]  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral SO`b +B  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has C)cuy7<  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for ,y)V5 c1  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has K;R!>p}t  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 cU "uKR  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is %y+v0.aWH+  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the Nm#[A4  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract ka$la;e3  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence qjN*oM,  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors ?{1& J9H  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to C5TC@w1*  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. 6"2IV  
METHODS $F@ ,,*  
Study population s[t?At->  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual ^= qL[S6/M  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 %\1W0%w  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to ,UxAHCR~9  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. _"#n%@  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of N3\vd_D (  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen u y13SkW  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites NqN}] nu6  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. CH0Nkf  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 m :2A[H+  
Original Article Z1U@xQj  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia "8\2w]"  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD .|KBQ MI  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia a6"-,Kg  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, T:*l+<?  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au G^le91$  
78 McCarty et al. |+Tq[5&R  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural Oh,]"(+  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural 5jsZJpk$  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify ,#j'~-5  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a jaQH1^~l/-  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of 9D7i>e%,;-  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, o`Q.;1(Y'  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of KESM5p"f  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. @jKB[S;JSn  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local U,Fyi6{~  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. c-ql  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian &BN#"- J  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. =G`g-E2  
Assessment of cataract XmN8S_M>v  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after zxeT{AFPr?  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine WJN) <+d  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the d-T pY*v  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using P=Su)c  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and 5t-, 5  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on mp z3o\n  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) %a!gN  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, :TkMS8  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, <6X*k{  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than gj I>tz}  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to W:K '2j  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual gyuBmY  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, Zn[ppsz|  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. ABcB-V4  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to (p<pF].  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the .eLd0{JtN  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight !;0K=~(Y^  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the <T&v\DN  
analyses. D}Sww5ZmP  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., ,e$6%R  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in -+0kay%  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. RGrQ>'RL  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman na"!"C s3  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph p}<60O"r$  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were ~H1<8py\J  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera X0R EC%  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 EX#AJ>?V(  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately lqKj;'  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated e['<.Yf+  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies [c;#>UQMf  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were 1GK>&;  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, 5 7-Hx;  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph Eku  9u  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical Wky9w r:g  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) : ^("L,AF  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to =4l @A>  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. 4QTHBT+2`  
Assessment of risk factors f 9Kt>2IN  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information Q$v00z]f*  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 ^'a#FbMtt  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration WTJ{ M$  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, lo(C3o'  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension (zsv!U  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and 6dV )pJd  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were J=t}9.H~=  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to &lLfVa-l  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants =$fz</S=J  
and use of vitamin supplements. w"wW0uE^  
Data management and statistical analysis T7^;!;i`X  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a *=.~PR6W{  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, pCA`OP);=  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or 7HBf^N.  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at FK593z  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms dGn 0-l'q  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and j~G(7t  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency RYjK4xT?Y/  
checks were performed on the entire data set. ?VmgM"'md  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was 9K/EteS  
employed for statistical analyses. YnRO>`  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific HyVV,q^E  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to ^`'\eEa  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five &h I!mo  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates )q-NE)  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific rZJJ\ , |  
data were weighted according to the 1996 t]@>kAA>2L  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the _&BK4?H@b  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. 3NLn}  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared jts0ZFHc-  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated .Y;f 9R  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted 6dR+qJa6i  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the JM,%| E  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. 1vj@ qw3  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically z&amYwQcI  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use Ne1Oz}  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The f?Zjd&|Ch  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment ,bl }@0A  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with 6I +0@,I  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence 7qB4_  
limits. Hyy b0c^=  
RESULTS (yq e 4  
Study population i *.Y  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 G|rE\h 2w  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) E{u6<B*  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did hLLSmW (  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was 3 y}E*QE  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as P[ :_"4U  
a whole. ~DInd-<5  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to %;k Hnl  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The >o?v[:u*  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to 3Tl<ST\  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural U"k$qZ[  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) W\~^*ny P6  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. 5CFNBb%Xy  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery nnv|GnQST  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases o6[.$C  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any ZZT #V%Q=u  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). X/~uF 9a'<  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three Jbu2y'zE  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence '> "{yi-  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes UY< PiP  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% 2FIL@f|\7z  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract al9wNtMT  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract YExgUE|  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall U N9hZ>9  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was +X=*>^G(-  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). Jl/wP   
Risk factors for unoperated cataract ~#pATPW@(  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified YaC%69C'  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated e}UQN:1  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents `6U!\D  
as information about risk factor exposure was not BO[:=x`  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed \R#SoOd  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence %k!CjW3  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic }|DspO  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a !"L.gu-'  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use UkL1h7}a\  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private {X!OK3e  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, ']M/'CcM  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. M-o'`e'  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the 2*: q$c  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having s<O$ Y  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract 8SGaS&  
surgery were not available. 2cMC ZuO  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate R/vHq36d  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had ~t6q-P  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been FdU]!GO- X  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment {&51@UX  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant '~[8>Q>  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression w#"\*SKK  
model. The factors that remained significantly related M+/G>U  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever gEh/m.L7  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been zxyl+tU &  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors -k'<6op  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate N^L@MR -  
model. x?h/e;  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract 2\xw2VQ@P  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with qN!oN*  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 &,nv+>D  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort Ew8@{X y  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total ]eL# bJ  
(years) (%) (%) (%) UC!mp?   
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) RZa/la*  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) mQ[$U  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) /3b *dsYsl  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) 2b"*~O;  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) `^M ]|7  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) \]X.f&u  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) -Jd|H*wWo  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) pKSCC"i&j  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) +3v)@18B1  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) xGd60"w2  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0)  }k^uup*{  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) iE%"Q? Q/  
Age-standardized i5e10@Q{  
(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) q<YM,%mgj  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 bC{4a_B  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% C=?S  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, `4"8@>D  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). "{0G,tdA  
Outcomes of cataract surgery .3 EZk86  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior o[C^z7WG0  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were omG2p  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular EC+t-:a]  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular j7I=2xnTWu  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact !=9x=  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of is.t,&H4P]  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected Cfi{%,em  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% _>gz&  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes C,|&  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, 4^7 v@3  
P = 0.027). LU3pCM{  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity &PMQ]B  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without :jiEn y  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract Ycr3$n]e  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, HE}0_x.  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the ~Ztn(1N  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 KzHN|8 $o  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this (5T>`7g8  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four m6Dm1'+  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these ~j!n`#.\  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction (4H\ho8+mp  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one YidcVlOsO  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract O8;/oL4 U  
surgery. Q{/z>-X\x  
DISCUSSION j0l{M c5  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically gawY{Jr8I  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract Y9.3`VX  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes [@i:qB>B  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual 6[m~xegG  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and }dc0ZRKgx  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is !W}sOK7#  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, N{Sp-J>  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract ^G4YvS(  
services throughout Australia. CJ<nUIy'z  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age c=sV"r?  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is z5@XFaQ  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous lZk  z\  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye fU6YJs.H^8  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract 0i~U(qoI  
between studies because of different methodologies and CCTU-Xz/  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well 1l-5H7^w2?  
as the different age structures of the study populations. a_N7X  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of _H$Lu4b)N  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. hBU)gP75  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity Y"FV#<9@7E  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. ::Zo` vP  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the $PJ==N  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. KVZ B`c$<t  
80 McCarty et al. GDLw_usV  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort v,")XPY  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total 5FZw (E  
(years) (%) (%) (%) uw mN !!TS  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) qvn.uujYS  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( ny-:%A  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) KZKE&bTx  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) bZ* = fdh  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) _xKn2?d8g  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) )oIh?-WL  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) ?V6,>e_+  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) ~0MpB~ {xd  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) YTTyMn  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) &=lc]sk  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) ;,bgJgK  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) fJS:46  
Age-standardized w/|&N>ZOx  
(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) 9KVJk</:n  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract 4! dc/K  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. 4l 67B]o  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 Znb={hh  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the vT?^#  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude ;1(^H:7T  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the {lf{0c$X.  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). Q ^b&   
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains ZJ3g, dc  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban 4)gG_k  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than !Gmnck&+  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, O},}-% G  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in re*}a)iL  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, vhBW1/w&F  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens 0:V /z3?  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. SA TX_  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable ?~o`mg  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, CXq[VYM&X  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that 4Fg2/O_3  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and rI>x'0Go*  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is q%sZV>  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted -PpcFLZ|  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement _wKwiJs  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We h ;*x1BVE  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction sa'1hX^@  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have NsB]f{7>8+  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this /S]$Hu|  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their 72, m c  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants ]?}>D?5  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the SW9 C 8Q  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ M+%Xq0`T  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their 'C5id7O&  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to )Q=u[ p  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change Wep^He\:  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function v.]{b8RR  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in ,-6Oma -  
overall quality of life.22 -m^- p  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually E ASnh   
significant posterior capsule opacification following I~6) Gk&  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% RZHfT0*jL  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated c 4AJ`f.5  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear d`/8Q9tQ  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an $UzSPhv[  
opaque capsule. ZS.=GjK  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and @ZIS v'F  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, "w?0f["  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We @g#5d|U);  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more Ts.2\-+3  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is atZe`0  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 2/ +~h(Cc  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any x+Yo#u22  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of k@7#8(3  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care OkC.e')Vx  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without +JI,6)Ry  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the J!om"h  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated ~Z5AImR|  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. 45 ^ Z5t  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem _S) K+C|@  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract K3mP6Z#2  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will ~B[e*| d  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the #H7 SLQr\  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in dCo)en  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well s={>{,E  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes 9&r]k8K  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. 5=V"tQ&d9U  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract ,esEh5=Ir  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for 80Y% C-Y:  
cataract extractions increases. lq.:/_m0  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS -o~zb-E  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants |"K%Tvxe  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the koT 3~FK  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell _ uOi:Ti  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and _xAru9=n^  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient B{\Y~>]Pj  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal ga|<S@u?}  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. n=j) M  
REFERENCES ?8$`GyjS  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. T%.Y so{  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. }eSy]r[J  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, 7W}%ralkg  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population (P? |Bk [  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. a)W|gx6Y  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens A'CD,R+gR  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated 8L:AmpQdpA  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. U;3t{~Ym  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related  gwIR3u  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. ^}2!fRKAmo  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. zq + 2@"q  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye }s?3   
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population d(}? \|  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: Mh3.GpS  
363–71. [&~x5l 8\C  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. |}^u<S8X  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye r1q'+i  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. 3_G0eIE"u  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. dSjO 12b  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient m~;.kc  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Wk^{Tn/]  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. _fgsHx>l7  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated :BR_%$  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. =M:Po0?0E  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. LTBH/[q5  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too QpzdlB44l  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal 7Z +Fjy-B  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: pno}`Cer  
77–80. i+QVs_jW  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice f }r \  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? Q2oo\  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. g#fn(A  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest )M.g<[= ^  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye Tn,_0  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic P$Y w'3v/  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. g_PP 9S_?  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading ekfa"X_  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. r9-ayp#pC  
82 McCarty et al. 8T+o.w==  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & bCTN^  
Sons, 1977; 249–73.  O|Vc  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume f3vl=EA4|  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International H {_D#It  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. ?~sNu k  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and 5s%e9x|kP  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. FW2x  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison Qa2p34Z/  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased :Eh}]_  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment tpzh  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. g>7i2  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the %Y/;jC Y  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health ZLVgK@ l  
Organization, 1997. sm?b,T/  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, vEG7A$Z"  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation }"RVUYU  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. iVVR$uzhH  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. `X ()"Qw  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of *Vb#@O!  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative 1f"}]MbLR  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. xz} CqPJ#  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. Pec40g:#F  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated Bn.R,B0PL  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. !z :j-gT3  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. 18kWnF]n=  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract wmMn1q0F  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and TZn5s ~t  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. EKw)\T1  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. G^; ]]Ji"  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to cJSwA&  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. ?J+*i d  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. ",5=LW& ,  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A !K=$Q Uq  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule vy7?]}MvV  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. &liFUP?   
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. K0@bh/i/^  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health ?!c7Zx,(  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. q+;lxR5D  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in 5ff5M=M  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, q{[y4c1bG{  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract LF (S"Of  
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