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 92d6U2T4&  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes AUNQA  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to (85Fv&a  
unoperated cataract in Australia. i|}[A  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual C,NxE5?h  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than ,FMx5$  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination EV^~eTz  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography $w0lrh[+  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who ;9ly'<up  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater )aao[_ZS  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or >sjhA|gXk  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. /43-;"%>  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne |'+eMl  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 ;w-qHha  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria -,aeM~  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract O Xi@c;F  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had "zY](P  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49  "t$k  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber XfE -fH1j  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber c8M2 ^{O,`  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated h:)Ci!D;  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or G #T<`>T  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven |*X*n*oI  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate l|+BC  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery TLf9>= OVh  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% 9F- )r'  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone -l-E_6|/W  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an -MugnB6  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision :!f(F9  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no <0.$'M~E  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural Lru-u:  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance mNAY%Wn6k  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated q7m6&2$[  
cataract. ]PP:oriWl  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is %=<IGce  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced c<BO gNr  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of W*:,m8wk  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes +P`(Rf"luu  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. N_Af3R1_  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health ixh47M  
services accessibility, prevalence TfZ6F8|B  
INTRODUCTION geefnb  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in "%QD{z_L  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all v)kEyX'K2d  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate j#6|V]l  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be mN5 8r"!J  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 i~{ _eQV  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting l??;3kh1  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is QldzQ%4c\  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in nxap\Lf  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists 3Gr&p6  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather \H5Jk$*  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral F[7x*-NO-  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has snp v z1iS  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for 7TX, T|>9  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has :Px\qh}K  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 4`2$_T$ F  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is M\+*P,i  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the W)SjQp6  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract g "!\\:M  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence (%Oe_*e}Y  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors DcV<y-`'1  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to XqR{.jF.  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. ke.7Zp2.R  
METHODS dNV v4{S  
Study population d\XRUO[  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual t&814Uf&\  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 f@:CyB GQ  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to cvAtwQ'  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. <qiICb)~  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of I Ru$oF}  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen J/4y|8T/y  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites iWXMKu  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. d0C8*ifFO  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 :+kUkb-/  
Original Article Xn7 [n  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia l6B.6 '4)w  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD T=? bdIl  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia z(d4)z 8'6  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, mM xHR$2  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au o#d$[oa  
78 McCarty et al. I>m;G `  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural p6blD-v  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural E0bFx5e5fu  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify *Pb.f  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a V/ UB9)i+  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of <jL#>L%%  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, m0iV m|  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of Pt3[|4L  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. z`9l<Q/  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local <<BQYU)Ig  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. v=+k"gm6  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian J:W'cH$cR  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. .5k^f5a  
Assessment of cataract #8qyg<F  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after v j@V !j?  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine s{%fi*  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the n1`T#%e  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using &1$8q0  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and @{de$ ODu  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on j) <[j&OWw  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) ht$ WF  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, wO\!xW:  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, "x.88,T6  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than cl#OvQ  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to JbVi1?c  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual 0 wYiu  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, V'$oTZ`  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. kOzt"t&  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to K;kLQ2)  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the \ 6jF{  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight %`N&t i  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the c8!j6\dC*  
analyses.  2w;G4  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., aSxG|OkKy  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in "Vq@bNtu+  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. olslzXn 7o  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman c[6zX#{`  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph .M`LUb"!  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were .2{6h  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera P|yGx)'^P  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 " -<}C%C  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately R0z?)uU#  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated =k_XKxd  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies o4U]lK$  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were FDZeIj9uF  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, T;xHIg4  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph =t ~+63)  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical $&c<T4$d  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) Jq=X!mT d.  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to p,!fIx  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. :H~UyrN  
Assessment of risk factors gizmJ:<  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information []sB^UT  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 d8VWi*  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration ~Tpe,juG_  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, I 0x`H)DA  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension m1M;'tT@  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and 8T!fGzHx  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were <yPq;#z(!  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to Po2_ 0uX  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants Y#Sd2h,^X  
and use of vitamin supplements. 5#N"WHz!  
Data management and statistical analysis O?+tY y?  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a 8YT_DM5iI  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, Cw9@2E'b  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or -&f]X u  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at y^0HCp{  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms `2Z4#$.  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and \ (3Qqbw  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency Wme1Uid  
checks were performed on the entire data set. TV$\v@\ =  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was OXa5Jg}=  
employed for statistical analyses. { c6DT  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific >qh>Qm8w  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to )edU <1P  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five 8as$h*W h  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates OoU'86)  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific  ?fqkM  
data were weighted according to the 1996 H *z0xxa  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the gpO_0U4lQ]  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. )U/@J+{{  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared w;h\Y+Myyk  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated f;_K}23  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted OJC*|kN-#^  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the )Zu Q;p  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. :g]HB ,78  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically n79 DS(t  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use ys"mP* wD  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The .k!k-QO5La  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment qkR,<"C|`  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with VgC9'"|  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence D+vl%(g  
limits. dBD4ogo1  
RESULTS   xhVq  
Study population NXG}0`QVT  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 WriJco<v  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) ^VLUZ  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did Q1>Op$ >h  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was =LeVJGF  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as ~sU! 1  
a whole. 5 xzB1n8  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to X7B)jH%N  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The 1 069]  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to i6\!7D]  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural />j+7ts  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) N=?kEX O  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. (P52KD[A[  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery c%,6L<[  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases ~9ls~$+*  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any *t-A6 )2  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). `F`'b)  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three Rb>RjHo S  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence "jN-Yd,z  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes =&g}Y  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% v]Q_  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract Ch&]<#E>`  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract 3Os3=Ix  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall $Aoqtz d\  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was ^3@a0J=F  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). H?bs K~  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract )B5gs%u]  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified oZcwbo8  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated NF.6(PG|  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents nXaX=  
as information about risk factor exposure was not GyM%vGl 3  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed 8!`.%)- 4  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence F?AfB[PM  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic bRe*(  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a v?"ee&Y6  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use bh6wI%8H  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private ^dKaa  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, n\al}KG  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. ,$ret@.H  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the wyEgm:Vt  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having -"fq34v  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract 4J|t}  
surgery were not available. aT1 W] i  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate ghR]$SG  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had ,/U 9v~  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been {!bJ.O l  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment MpvA--  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant hRcJ):Wyb  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression +-137!x\q  
model. The factors that remained significantly related H pfI  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever ADUI@#vk  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been 7ij=%if2@k  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors l@jJJ)Qyk  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate ,"R_ve  
model. +zPg`/  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract Db:WAjU  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with bG?[":k  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 ?OdA`!wE  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort l'f!za0  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total 7 [ji,.7  
(years) (%) (%) (%) EZW?(%b>H  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) pU/.|Sh  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) A+8b] t_k  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) i*>yUav"  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) go5!zSs  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) >f/g:[  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) yh<aFYdk  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) r&RSQHa)  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) =c 4U%d2  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) |&Wo-;Ud  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) + k:?;ZG  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) $Yc9><i  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) v_ h{_b8  
Age-standardized gV BV@v!W  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) &rKhB-18)  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 [8#l~ |U  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% -`&;3 7  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, pDQ,v"  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). jT',+   
Outcomes of cataract surgery |1R @Jz`  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior g> f394j  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were zT8K})#  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular k$c!J'qL&  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular uDR(^T{g#  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact Xo b##{P3  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of Re_.<_$  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected F2=97 =R  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% gO%3~f!vY#  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes Tec6]  :  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, }<p %PyM  
P = 0.027). KMa?2cJH#  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity LJ?7W,?  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without '4EJ_Vhztc  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract 3c)xNXq m  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, G8 VWx&RE  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the ?~"RCZ[;.f  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 ZC"p^~U_e[  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this 7o3f5"z  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four ``{xm1GK  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these 8I%1 `V  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction 6Y=)12T  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one [||$1u\%  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract 8Pq|jK "  
surgery. ^+88z>  
DISCUSSION B4%W,F:@  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically W>.qGK|l  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract HjrCX>v  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes ^c*'O0y[D  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual IIzdCa{l  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and t2>Vj>U  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is C 7v 8  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, >Gkkr{s9  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract tq{ aa  
services throughout Australia. LaRY#9  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age =73wngw  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is )l^w _;  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous W<t,Ivg  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye L49`=p<  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract a4?:suX$  
between studies because of different methodologies and nCt:n}+C7  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well $%LjIeVA5  
as the different age structures of the study populations. dI3U*:$X  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of 6:Ra3!V"v  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. ) b?HK SqI  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity ;sDFTKf  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. .pZwhb  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the A>Js`s  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. Jjv, )@yo  
80 McCarty et al. t68h$u  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort qm2  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total B+ +:7!  
(years) (%) (%) (%) UW!!!  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) ]h,XRDK  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( 5F $W^N  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) zgV{S Qo  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) IWX%6*Zz  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) s#>Bwn&b)  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) k1W q$KCwG  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) 4 QD.'+ L  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) wjDLsf,  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) lUbQ@7a<'  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) gq!| 0  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) hT]\*},  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) ?"\X46Gz;  
Age-standardized \:, dWL u  
(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) va[@XGaC3  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract X H,1\J-S  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. dX?8@uzu  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 ^^1rjh1I  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the # **vIwX-Q  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude }j;*7x8(  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the :_X9x{  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). Z(k7&^d  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains $# klgiL  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban WW\t<O;z  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than :+: vBrJm  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, U= QfInB  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in KeFEUHU  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, JI##l:,7r  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens 1 w*DU9f  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. .sCi9d WR  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable 6HeZ<.d&  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, '@t}8J  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that 0<(F 8  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and 4'9yMXR  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is >LS*G qjq  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted >,;, 6|S  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement `IN/1=]5  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We ;]XKe')  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction pH !e<m  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have ixJ%wnz  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this <e)5$Aj  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their O{@m,uY  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants :56f  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the EdgcdSb7  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ <B"M} Y>_P  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their 1T96W :   
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to N!RkV\:X  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change &\[3m^L  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function N i\*<:_  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in |^ K"#K  
overall quality of life.22 2pu8')'P  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually Y5rR  
significant posterior capsule opacification following LY> -kz]  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% o'uv5asdb  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated D`|.%  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear ~D[5AXV`^  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an 5yC$G{y V  
opaque capsule. TttD}`\.  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and &2i3"9k  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, dM|&Y6  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We 7soiy A  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more Ry5/O?Q L  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is =Tdh]0  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 X}!r4<;(  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any HW0EPJ  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of 4s{_(gy  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care k{fTq KS%h  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without O^tH43C  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the .Fdqn?c|+  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated F.nJX ZnJ  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. zP[_ccW@  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem JjH#,@'.  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract Z @:5vo  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will In%K  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the A..,.   
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in h}vzZZ2,  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well W6kDQ& q  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes 32DSZ0  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. uU&,KEH  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract I(i/|S&^  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for j_r?4k  
cataract extractions increases. KK}?x6wV0,  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i0,'b61qE  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants 95`Q=I|i  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the Cfizh@<  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell >g):xi3qK  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and 76Drhh(  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient uxbDRlOS  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal 'Gn-8r+  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. W%/lBkP  
REFERENCES r6B\yH2  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. &e#>%0aS  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. o6H\JCne  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, #g.J,L  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population uO4kCK<7C  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. a$Lry?pb  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens ?q}XD c  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated "8p fLI  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. UV?.KVD~  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related c=S-g 9J  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. c|f)k:Q  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. ##%R|P3  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye u )'l|Y  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population ya+eGD@N':  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: z0@)@4z!  
363–71. }v0IzGKs  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. aLwd#/!  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye =c)O8  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. Sa V]6/|  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. ?0Xt|  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient rUunf'w`e1  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. $(2c0S{1  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. $ Cr? }'a  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated 7e,EI9?.  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. IN? A`A  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. {C=d9z~:  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too yFt'<{z[nL  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal B_u+$Odo  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: D`r ^2(WW  
77–80. dAOmqu, 6  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice 8G?{S.%.  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? Qp{rAAC:  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. ^s@?\v  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest DzLm~ aF  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye [CH%(#>i~  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic &`7tX.iMlh  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. /H+j6*}r  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading {z?e<  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. wU_e/+ 0h  
82 McCarty et al. n !mtMPH$  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & |$ `LsA.  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. V7u;"vD  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume u"-q"0  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International CuPZ0  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. 1btQ[a6j  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and W:{1R&$l  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. BnH< -n_  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison Le"$ksu>  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased 0_Tr>hz  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment 6sb,*uSn%  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. xg)cA C\=  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the '7Dg+a^x7  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health X b-q:{r1h  
Organization, 1997. W[ A;VOj0$  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, vINm2%*zJ  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation bLoAtI  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. 7Zp'}Om<I  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. $6 \v1  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of 9mkt.>$  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative 2S EfEkk  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. \?&P|7N  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. dK,j|  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated vMKmHq  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. 6rMGl zuRo  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. @#Jc!p7)  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract V*SKWP  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and Z8tQ#Pu{  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. #R<4K0Xan  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. J3cbDE%^m  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to U'@eUY(Ov$  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. %CJgJ,pk>  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. qQ[&FjTO`  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A sL]KBux  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule +[Nc";Oy  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. }5-^:}gL   
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. K5No6dsD  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health 'S\YNLqQ  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. hu.c&Q>  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in c*$&MCh  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, &S9S l  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract Q-fi( UP  
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:
2+6=? 正确答案:8
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交