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 j+B+>r ^  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes gDY+'6m;  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to G-5wv  
unoperated cataract in Australia. \SA"DT  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual 3I|&}+Z6  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than )TYrb:M'm  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination Ww(($e!  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography v4X\LsOP  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who .QwwGm  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater *{3&?pxx  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or ] qT\z<}  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. WD"3W)!  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne 41\r7 BS  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 #g)$m}tv?  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria [A@K)A$f  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract )(&Z&2~A  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had a[Q\8<  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 gEWKM(5B}  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber - v\n0Jt  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber Mi|PhDXMh  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated N$Pi4  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or O a[G #  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven wi{qN___  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate ze%kP#c6!  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery #LP38 wE  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% 3*N-@;[>b  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone fn6;  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an wHGiN9A+  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision BvXA9YQ3  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no fSe$w#*I  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural p i ;,?p-  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance j 3<|X  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated cba  
cataract. 7d44i  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is gBF2.{"^  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced v() wngn  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of .X D.'S  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes \v7->Sy8  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. 6 WD(  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health rQ_!/J[9  
services accessibility, prevalence 1qEpQ.:](  
INTRODUCTION 9Ai e$=  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in }8H_^G8  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all n^HKf^]  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate a>3#z2#  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be m|:O:<  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 0^5*@vt  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting (qf%,F,_L  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is Gxtqzr*  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in *bi!iz5F  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists B=4xZJ Py  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather QYm]&;EI  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral :\]TAQd-  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has +3;`4bW  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for |OgtAI9  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has *,hg+?lZ  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 \Zpg,KOT  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is 0 `Yg  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the Thlqe?  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract S:.Vt&+NJ  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence - &AgjzN!  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors !Z r 9t|_  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to m1d*Lt>F@  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. " [Z'n9C  
METHODS e-4 Qw #cw  
Study population |8DMj s()*  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual z 1~2w:  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 T@Q,1^?i  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to *$+:Cbe-F  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. ;J]Lzh  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of Vr|sRvz  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen HVG:q#=C  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites >EVY,  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. ['`Vg=O.{  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 >j%4U*  
Original Article KF.d:  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia y)Y0SY1\j  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD ::&hfHR*P  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia (8XP7c]5  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, U?WS\Jji3!  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au t,v=~LE  
78 McCarty et al. UA%tI2  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural 3|Vh[iAa\  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural Z%_m<Nf8T  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify V1d{E 0lM  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a I<&(Dg|XQ  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of ws_/F  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, x&['g*[L0  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of "QV?C  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. +{7/+Zz  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local S0zk<S   
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. 1>"Yw|F-|3  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian sf(2~BMQI  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. bS2)L4MQY  
Assessment of cataract :Qekv(z  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after l`V^d   
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine \-2O&v'}  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the :jP4GCxU|  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using Nfdh0v  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and xUw)mUn@N  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on VW%eB  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) 0;6 ^fiSY;  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, aEJds}eE6)  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, 1#OM~v6B  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than &.4m(ZX  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to u@ psVt   
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual Scfk] DT  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, p>#QFd"m  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. uL K4tQ  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to  +bC=yR  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the rF>7 >wq  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight #sg^l >/*  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the Y7L1`<SC  
analyses. 7z@Jw  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., <lxE^M  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in ]>%M%B  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. *H''.6  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman _w\A=6=q|  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph v? VNWK2  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were =yy7P[D  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera Bl6>y/  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 tc2e)WZP  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately 8E:d!?<^&I  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated O*%@(w6  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies 0Ia8x?80V  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were g /v"E+  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, m0(]%Kdw  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph = "N?v-  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical #;WKuRv   
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) u+ ?Wm40E  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to FWJhi$\:D]  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. E2Jmo5yJR  
Assessment of risk factors |_ u  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information ;I5u"MDHGI  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 >#[u"CB  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration X\yy\`o  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, 5 ?{ytNCY  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension %0<-5&GE  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and NUvHY:  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were [Jjb<6[o  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to  /l)|B  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants sPod)w?e  
and use of vitamin supplements. &~SPDiu.t  
Data management and statistical analysis ee+*&CT)  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a {@7{!I|eD  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, 6L)]nE0^  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or BnL[C:|  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at km(Mv  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms !B#Lea  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and 1;Dug  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency Zc<fopih  
checks were performed on the entire data set. P`$"B0B)  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was JTw3uM, e  
employed for statistical analyses. :4(.S<fH)-  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific |1@/gqa  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to 9PM\D@A{  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five n.a55uy  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates {r$n $  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific X9YYUnR2  
data were weighted according to the 1996 64hl0'67y  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the kp4(_T7R  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. W_C#a'$  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared VEuT!^0Z  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated etPb^&#$  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted )225ee>  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the b&i0)/;  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. &f:"p*=a\  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically is2OJ,  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use 6^Q Bol  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The POl[]ni=>  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment 9qHbV 9,M  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with D(m2^\O[  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence f*{~N!g  
limits. h^tU*"   
RESULTS bm &$wf  
Study population :dZq!1~t  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 # -0}r  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) aMxg6\8  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did k4:e0Wd  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was #LGAvFA*_F  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as O,&nCxB]  
a whole. Y"x9B%e  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to C6$F.v  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The |6M:JI8  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to 7_HJ|QB  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural N3_r qRd^  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) OwdA6it^f  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. ({GN.pC(  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery cTU%=/gbc<  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases ~HW}Wik  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any $IM}d"/9  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). pyW&`(]S  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three QoGvjf3z  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence 1ZUmMa1(  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes b,Z\{M:f;F  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% lK}W%hzU  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract [>rX/a%c  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract pj~Ao+  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall J  u0W  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was l*v6U'J  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). t_VF=B^LuR  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract _a~uIGN  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified }m`+E+T4  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated _P^ xX'v  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents C78V/{  
as information about risk factor exposure was not 4axc05  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed 5Tl3k=o}  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence I6q]bQ="  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic STr&"9c  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a %, U@ D4w  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use L.%N   
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private aUqVcEU1  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, 62}rZVJq  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. =;) M+"  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the QSaJb?I  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having K}r@O"6*\  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract eSC69m fD  
surgery were not available. q=_&izmE'7  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate e5 "?ol0  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had &fIx2ZM[  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been KMhEU**  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment 5D~>Ed;  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant wva| TZ  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression T!iRg=<bz  
model. The factors that remained significantly related "!fvEE  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever TB8a#bK4  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been jRCf!RO  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors h=1cD\^|qw  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate 3RW3<n  
model. b{Qg$Z JeR  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract ITq$8  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with -f4>4@y  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 ;'|Mt)\  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort 3hPj;-u  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total [h3y8O  
(years) (%) (%) (%) WX2w7O'R  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) PGj?`y4  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) FTA[O.tiG  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) Yw\7`  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) uPp9 UW  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) J4xJGO  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) %"1*,g{  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) .QaHE`e{  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) fFBD5q(n  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) Za&.sg3RG  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) 3XOf-v:~  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) y*AB=d^  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) U'Xw'?Uj  
Age-standardized x;G~c5  
(95% CL) Combined 19.7 (16.3, 23.1) 23.2 (16.1, 30.2) 16.5 (2.06, 30.9) 21.5 (18.1, 25.0) YTtuR`  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 +yh-HYo`  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% v+3-o/G7  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, y'a(>s(  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). HifU65"8  
Outcomes of cataract surgery |<YoH$.  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior <K# ]1xCA  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were $c WO`\XM  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular 2K 8?S  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular z_jTR[dY  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact icX$<lD  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of vfh0aW-O  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected {O"?_6',  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% y[}O(  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes ^aW?0qsH  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, 7= o2$  
P = 0.027). Xgy)Z:R  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity Cw=wU/)  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without $S"QyAH~-a  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract UacG q,  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, 'k9?n)<DW  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the xTnd9'Pk`:  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 Ozygr?*X  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this bi fi02  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four -*?Y4}mK  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these A0NNB%4|/  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction '.@'^80iQ  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one %HRFH  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract a?+Ni|+  
surgery. 8tc9H}>  
DISCUSSION ,|: a7b]  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically 8e'0AI_>  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract a.|4`*1[;  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes n 0X_m@  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual x 5u.D^  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and gyW*-:C  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is + s6 wF{  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, iA~b[20&  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract u_aln[oIv  
services throughout Australia. 5XNIX)H  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age !b O8apn  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is \WM*2&  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous ~P*t_cpZ  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye *y uw8  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract nL}bCX{  
between studies because of different methodologies and U! F~><  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well `Z{kJMS  
as the different age structures of the study populations. ZQvpkO7}M  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of -jB1tba  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. A9! gww  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity d{.cIv  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. 2,nKbE9*  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the (o _fY .  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. P'#m1ntxQ  
80 McCarty et al. i0uBb%GMT  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort DBl.bgf  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total  6h N~<  
(years) (%) (%) (%)  #q~SfG  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) ?lv{;4BC  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( 9?r|Y@xh]  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) 09"C&X~  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) |U?5% L  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) *b?C%a9  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) - Z"w  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) . m_y5J  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) v*5n$UFV  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) (US]e un  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) :g3n [7wR  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) chsjY]b  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) lIO.LF3  
Age-standardized $]4^ENkI  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) e#K =SV!H  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract _`WbR&d2Id  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. Q44Pg$jp  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 38!  $9)  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the W-%oj.BMA  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude CU 2; m\Hc  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the cTm oz.0  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). goi.'8M|/b  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains I,vy__ sZ  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban $b\`N2J-_  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than <OF7:f  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, s S8Z5k;  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in S2K_>kvG)~  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, &^4\Rx_I  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens 9 )u*IGj  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. elb|=J`M0  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable +vaz gO<u  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, LF <fp&C)h  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that :kqJ~  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and Z5;1ySn{  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is ?8. $A2(Xw  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted  @ jO3+  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement !> -cMI6E  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We 31 4PcSc  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction QIF|pZ+^  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have <Bb $d@c  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this R_\{a*lV0  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their W$ #FM$U  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants {<iIL3\mC  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the [Rw0']i`4  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ <~t38|Ff@  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their AU}e^1h  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to Q.#@xaX'{`  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change rA&|!1q"B  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function Ev%4}GwO4  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in L=3^A'|  
overall quality of life.22 6Lz{/l8  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually dG}fpQ3&  
significant posterior capsule opacification following ~PP*k QZlJ  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% bwUsE U 0  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated E{sTxO I$  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear OaRtGJnR  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an Lg pj<H[  
opaque capsule. e*jt(p[Ge  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and Kf2*|ZHj  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, w' K\}G~  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We G*2bYsnhX  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more J/8aDr (+  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is $Ll ]h</Z  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 *,{. oO9#  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any 2+ F34  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of 2;r(?ebw  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care /vS!9f${  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without eG9 t n{  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the 'm}K$h(U  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated y_M<\b  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. 7'Y 3T[  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem G$ XvxJ  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract %sP C3L  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will Enm#\(j  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the q]YPDdR#  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in .pNWpWL.  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well A-1Wn^,> *  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes y[Zl,v7  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. W_9-JM(r  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract UhYeyT  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for )n}Wb+2I  
cataract extractions increases. ,@jRe&6  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS j9u/R01d  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants )(~4fA5j)  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the '; ,DgR;'  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell }GJIM|7^  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and "_]n_[t2C  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient LvgNdVJDP|  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal zQM3n =y  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. BM!\U 6  
REFERENCES E</Um M+ R  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. 9YRoWb{y  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. YMOy 6C  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, h 92\1,  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population 8 7P{vf#  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. dOh'9kk3  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens { 2G9>'  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated S/G6NBnbS  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. h~haA8i?{  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related H7n5k,  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. yG|^-O}L  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. ?nJ7lLQA  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye BTjfzfO"  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population }ozlED`E  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: vKN"o* q  
363–71. UOHU 1.3$T  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. s'' ?: +  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye :=vB|Ch:~  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. yzr>]"o  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. zJJ KLr;  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient 7sKN`  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Ci6yH( RE  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. Bv_C *vW  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated }YJ(|z""  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. 0jCYOl  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. k%-_z}:3V  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too ^]c /hb|X  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal #k2&2W=x  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: CqX2R:#  
77–80. P\ \4 w)C  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice q<` YJ,  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? YVt#( jl  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. p'UYH t  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest :q=u+h_  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye YBn"9w\#  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic nN" Y~W^k  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. #g[jwl'  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading Qr]xj7\@i  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. H&jK|]UXoO  
82 McCarty et al. Eyi^N0  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & %7=B?c |  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. )\!_`ob  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume 9EzXf+f  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International h(]aP<49L  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. nEu,1  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and yO Ed8  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. Jydz2 zt!  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison 5W"&$6vj  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased OAPR wOQ^=  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment V`xZ4 i%L  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. {~NiGH Y  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the Eukj2 a  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health kBolDPvBG  
Organization, 1997. ,E,oz{,i(  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, xGsg '  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation :* |%g  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. l M ]n  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. ozN#LIM>P  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of *Pj[r  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative ?K, xxH  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. 0>hV?A  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. P,5gaT)  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated Wr+?ul*_  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. 9x;CJhX  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. nXHU|5.I  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract H9'Y` -r  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and <aps)vF  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. t\LAotTF/  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. E__^>=  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to F-i`GMWC  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. <vS J< WY  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. lm'L-ZPN  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A S[!sJ-rG  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule EHpIbj;n  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. cRYnQ{$'  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. >q+o MrU  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health >y&Db  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. }.md$N_F  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in +EI+@hS  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, VQSwRL3B=  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract R5 O{;/w  
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:
4+6=? 正确答案:10
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交