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 $k% 2J9O  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes *Kg ks4  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to /nNN,hz  
unoperated cataract in Australia. HC s?iJ  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual 1};Stai'  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than d.d/<  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination M`!H"R7  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography IY\5@PVZ  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who 6j]0R*B7`Q  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater kfY}S  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or VU]`&`~J  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. K!Y71_#  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne !``,gExH  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 #gs`#6 ,'  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria [<yaXQxl  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract O- hAFKx  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had  DA,?}  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 _8UU'1d  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber A]oV"`f  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber >@_^fw)  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated `l[c_%Bm  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or v^*K:#<Q!  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven <<5(0#y#  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate }(73Syl#  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery SO'vp z{  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% &@OT*pNna  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone ;h  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an 7[XRd9a5(  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision jm/`iXnMf  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no e6$WQd`O  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural \Uq(Zga4)  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance I,vJbvvl!  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated ~=l;=7 T  
cataract. `|& O*`  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is R-d:j^:f  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced 3;]H1 1  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of c,+:i1IAy  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes ,w4V?>l  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. >!1-lfa8  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health n9ej7oj  
services accessibility, prevalence sS'm !7*(3  
INTRODUCTION .Vvx,>>D  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in 'e'cb>GnA  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all $5%SNzzl  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate jasy<IqT!{  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be /!XVHkX[  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 tW}'g:s  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting -k "/X8  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is O5T{eBo\  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in Yufc{M00  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists "b3"TPfK  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather aHK}sr,U  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral 8P&:_T!  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has 0*{%=M  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for O k=hT|}Y  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has Vp@?^ imL  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 _L=h0H l  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is AFE~ v\Gz  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the NyNXP_8  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract :& ."ttf=  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence ds[|   
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors j*r{2f4Rt  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to c(s.5p ^  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. J<jy2@"tXo  
METHODS s|r3Gv|G  
Study population 4~Q/"hMSkO  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual {;6`_-As%  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 ~oY^;/ j  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to &&>ekG 9@  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. v):Or'$~M  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of WNrk}LFof  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen w ;^ra<*<+  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites I9ep`X6Y  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. k@W1-D?  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 [MY|T<q  
Original Article %n9aaoD  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 6(ol1 (U  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD $*fMR,~t&  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia mc\"yC ^s  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, r* Ca}Z  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au HN|%9{VeB  
78 McCarty et al. \bw2u!  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural v` 1lxX'*  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural P/_['7  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify brUF6rQ  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a pYf-S?Y/V  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of /mzlH  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, P5 ywhw-  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of >~0Z& d  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. Pe3o;mx  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local M9%$lCl   
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. h <<v^+m  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian T]~ xj4  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. x7 ,5  
Assessment of cataract AFwdJte9e  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after 63IM]J  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine FfT`;j  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the SXP]%{@ R/  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using DZ tsy!xA  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and KF:78C  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on inp7K41  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) /od@!/  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, &mS^ZyG  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, ;#< 0<  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than 8'y$M] e9n  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to ")p\q:z6  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual *MW\^PR?  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, &s>Jb?_5Mx  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. )MT}+ai  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to ^E>3|du]O  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the ]JQ ULE)  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight s_p!43\J  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the nQ3A~ ()  
analyses. V0a3<6@4  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., ~6md !o%i  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in {R{=+2K!|k  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. P@~yx#G  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman gbD KE{  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph SUK?z!f <i  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were =($xG#g`  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera 9%obq/Lb  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 vW@=<aS Z  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately ?:9"X$XR  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated *|HY>U.  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies }c:M^Ff  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were [()koU#w.  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, .*Qx\,  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph u_Z+;{]Pj  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical `\ol,B_l  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) O^rDHFj,  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to _,*r_D61S  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. RT8 ?7xFc  
Assessment of risk factors 7 a}k  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information ;5Ac FB  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 3PF_H$`oJ  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration |k9 C/  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, -D: b*D  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension I]_5}[I  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and PZzMHK?hP  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were !bP@n  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to TkF[x%o  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants IAyp2  
and use of vitamin supplements. l}P=/#</T  
Data management and statistical analysis lk=<A"^S  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a vw@S>G lGg  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, EhBKj |y  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or HE\K@3-  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at H%{+QwzZ[j  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms #s9aI_  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and CNx8] _2  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency [PbOfxxgA  
checks were performed on the entire data set. 51.%;aY~z  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was ;O #>Y  
employed for statistical analyses. ]JR +ayk7  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific yF/jFn  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to N  Zz8j^  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five V^~:F  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates 7o}J%z  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific cl/_JQ&  
data were weighted according to the 1996 7>*vI7O0l  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the Dum9lj  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. ?Ss! e$jf  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared {(?4!rh  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated SZCze"`[  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted PTV:IzoW  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the h zn6kbv  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. /2VJX@h  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically ;]:@n;c\  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use 1m0c|ckb  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The [=`q>|;pOv  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment ZSm3XXk  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with +x}<IS8  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence g< .qUBPKX  
limits. [)X\|pO&  
RESULTS B4 }bVjs  
Study population [z9Z5sLO  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 y1L,0 ]  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) )@bQu~Y  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did Pj% |\kbNs  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was koi^l`B$  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as )wh A<lC  
a whole. QkC (uS  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to ;gr9/Vl  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The L_iFt!  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to ]e@Oiq  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural -A!%*9Z  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) P7/X|M z  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. M\Kx'N  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery 3=ymm^  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases SasJic2M  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any 65^9  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). <2qr}K{'A  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three lHX72s|V  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence cYt!n5w~W  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes A3@6N(  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% 3m)y|$R  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract  0lR5<^B  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract '`KY! ]L  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall M/K5#8Arj  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was 6NHX2Ja  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). b SU~XGPB  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract 7Jho}5J  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified ixD)VcD-f  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated  kPLxEwl  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents :6\qpex  
as information about risk factor exposure was not Ciz X<Cr}  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed Jze:[MYS  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence )hfpwdQ  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic 0KOgw*>_  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a Q$@I"V&G.  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use TbW38\>.R  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private @6 T/Tdz  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, |8tilOqI  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. j#q-^h3H  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the pg)WKbV  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having G*P#]eO  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract cH t#us  
surgery were not available. wi6 ~}~%  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate )|=j`jCC  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had HRf Yl,S,  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been ?+}_1x`  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment b2&0Hx  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant RdR p.pb8  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression 338k?nHxv  
model. The factors that remained significantly related l)l^[2  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever X?qK0fS  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been LuvY<~u  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors .jjG( L  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate fHd#u%63K  
model. [j/9neaye  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract aE$[5 2  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with R|87%&6']  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 Sk\K4  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort |"CZT#  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total DAr1 C+Dy  
(years) (%) (%) (%) }Sh?S]]`  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) V#gK$uv  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) eiaFaYe\  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) !Pfr,a  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) m'=Crei  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) =|y9UlsD  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) E,x+JeKV  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) h(u8&MHx  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) A&Usddcp  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) 6wjw^m0  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) LxSpctiNx  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) h_3E)jc  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) %axh`xK#  
Age-standardized V1 `o%;j  
(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) ?(F6#"/E  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 )e=D(qd  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% ' ;FnIZ  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, S3*`jF>q  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). m6\E$;`  
Outcomes of cataract surgery +YKi,  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior }9#r0Vja  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were P90yI  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular eFTpnG  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular ?*1uN=oI{*  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact ;yLu R  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of { VfXsI  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected Ls$D$/:q?  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% %G/ hD  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes lH x^D;m6  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, t?-n*9,#S  
P = 0.027). j<99FW"@e  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity *ebSq)  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without #@9/ g  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract b_#m}yZ6  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, oim9<_  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the ,c$_t+  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 9~5uaP$S  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this RK'\C\gMDu  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four "$Z= %.3Q  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these a LroD$#  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction EyD=q! ZVZ  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one jk; clwyz/  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract @uqd.Q  
surgery. b8`)y<7  
DISCUSSION G_3O]BMKd)  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically \:# L)   
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract Sz)' ogl  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes \Xt7`I<  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual TluW-S  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and LEbB(x;@  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is 53;}Nt#R  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, 8`q:Gz=M\  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract | C;=-|  
services throughout Australia. G\/zkrxmv  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age jH5 k  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is M)J5;^ ["  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous -j# 2}[J7  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye %B2'~|g  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract >a!/QMh  
between studies because of different methodologies and !1jBC.G1  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well e8>})  
as the different age structures of the study populations. ,8S/t+H  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of tVYF{3BhA  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. `&r+F/Ap2  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity e/KDw  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. \#2 Z)Kz  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the 0 cv{  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. 'Cb6Y#6  
80 McCarty et al. gDQ^)1k  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort 1jmjg~W  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total P>y@kPi   
(years) (%) (%) (%) A]_7}<<N  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) b <tNk]7  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( 3H'sHuK"X  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) f$o_e90mu  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) <v"R.<  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) lne|5{h  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) pE3 ?"YO  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) rP'me2 B  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) %HhBt5w  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) [CTnXb  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) #JqB ;'\  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) 8 v6(qBK  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) . o6Or:L  
Age-standardized ?=u\n;w)  
(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) ]]HNd7Vh  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract "6("9"  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. PioZIb/{  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 3RUy, s  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the +Z,;,5'5G  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude m%0p\Y-/  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the 7:e {;iG  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). ,10=  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains PgAf\.48a  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban  C;v.S5x  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than GWGSd\z  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, #j;^\rSv-  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in r[e##M  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, t <~h'U  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens g%o(+ d  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. }ZYd4h|g\z  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable A]*}HZ ,  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, )w em| :H  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that K&u_R  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and `Uq#W+r,  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is  O}gV`q;  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted UJUEYG  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement KA5v+~  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We H;mSkRD3N  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction v4<nI;Ux  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have PJ')R:e,  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this m<G,[Yc  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their wKh4|Ka  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants ]Ee?6]b N  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the .D~;u-%|F  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ 1}+3dB_s  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their B^=-Z8  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to m[osg< CR_  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change > -?f0 K  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function 1NFsb-<u  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in +.8 \p5  
overall quality of life.22 AF{\6<m  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually (y'hyJo  
significant posterior capsule opacification following [|wZ77\  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% Sz $ ~P9  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated W-f=]eWg  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear *tFHM &a  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an .8g) av+  
opaque capsule. ?PxP% $hS  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and L&8~f]  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, OdbEq?3S/?  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We _{O>v\u  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more Mexk~z A^  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is Rh2+=N<X  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 234p9A@  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any Xq4 O@V  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of 4KAZ ':  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care f%JIp#B  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without f5"k55}  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the %`r$g[<G  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated tFn)aa~L  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. ,pfG  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem ja'T+!k  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract 6- YU [HF  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will ]%SH >  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the hag$GX'2k  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in o[4}h:> dq  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well 0o4XUW   
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes M ?4 9TOQA  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. nPtuTySG  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract Wi<m{.%\E  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for ]q[D>6_  
cataract extractions increases. zk+9'r`-D  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 2;b\9R^>A  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants Po0A#Zl  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the u Mv,zO5  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell 3`?7 <YJ  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and z6P$pqyF  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient Qljpx?E  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal RBd7YWo\|j  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. I][*j  
REFERENCES  > |=ts  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. ty! `T+3  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. {Mk6T1Bkq  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, |-ALklXr  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population W@IQ^ }E  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. ATyEf5Id_  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens 1GRCV8 "Z^  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated 1I6px$^E\  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. RB\uK 1+  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related ~ Iuf}D;  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. NxY#NaE:?4  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. re<{ >  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye wlvgg  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population ~~P5k:  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: C) s5D  
363–71. j (d~aqW  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. \)[j_^  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye :cECRm*  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. $%Kf q[Q  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. :Yl-w-oe  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient ;'K5J9k  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. &z3o7rif$  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. /SB;Von  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated zw[m9N5\h  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. _{KG 4+5\X  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. m(!FHPvN  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too [q -h|m  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal 7$=In K  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: vE?G7%,  
77–80. GVn!O1jio  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice >bW #Zs,6  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? eauF ~md,  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. T8g$uFo  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest 5;EvNu  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye /4Gt{yg Sr  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic ~>|ziHx  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. iBa A9  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading +e``OeXog  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. S1_RjMbYM  
82 McCarty et al. V,njO{Q  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & K"MX!  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. !Vk^TFt`  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume 4WB0Pt{  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International !Uo4,g6r+  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. upmx $H>  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and QXK{bxwC  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. eR>oq,  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison ]-# DB^EQ  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased W>r+h -kR  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Pq$n5fZC !  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. e0 ecD3  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the TWTb?HP  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health ;uGv:$([g  
Organization, 1997. +}AI@+  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, 8oGRLYU N  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation c:('W16  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. n@3>6_^rwT  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. .}+}8[p4l  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of 8ao_i=&x  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative * T1_;4i  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. HzJz+ x:  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. 0jfuBj5!  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated U<XG{<2  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. 7_t'( /yu  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. fP1! )po  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract j>kqz>3  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and W,u:gzmhw  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. vDvFL<`vmD  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. +7}]E1Uf  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to I-)4YQI  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. ssL\g`xe  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. rN>R|].  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A 5r0YA IJ  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule uAk.@nfiEv  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. $cg cX  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. a'T;x`b8U,  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health 7p[n  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. VEH>]-0K  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in 05R@7[GWq  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, wuBPfb  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract .)3<Q}>  
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