Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology
?`?)QE8 2006;
7j-4TY~ 34
D A\2rLs : 880–885
6e|*E`I doi:10.1111/j.1442-9071.2006.01342.x
u ,KD4{! © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
z:wutqru r 8RoE`/T Correspondence:
F'21jy& Dr Garry Brian, 5 Hazelmere Parade, Sherwood, Qld 4075, Australia. Email:
grbrian@tpg.com.au H:V2[y8\ Received 11 April 2006; accepted 19 June 2006.
8A})V8 Original Article
gDpVeBd[ Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea
]Gsv0Xk1 Jambi N Garap
fumm<:<CLO MMed(Ophthal)
_z|65H ,
<<][hQs 1,2
rD3v$B Sethu Sheeladevi
ZbdZrE$ MHM
b0Ps5G\ u ,
,s"^kFl 3
a.k.n< Garry Brian
iP7(tnlW$ FRANZCO
{8W'%\!=
,
I 7{T 2,4
0AL=S$B) BR Shamanna
qm/22:&v5 MD
t.i 8
2Q ,
u04kF^ 3
G[uK -U Praveen K Nirmalan
n
FHUy9q MPH
)q8p k2 3
"*e$aTZB\ and Carmel Williams
lZ]ZDb?P MA
s<<ooycBrQ 4
dO!
kk"qn 1
dy%;W% The Fred Hollows Foundation – Papua New Guinea Eye Care Program,
*&^Pj%DX 2
y.mda:$~= Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine and Health
/[
5gX^A Sciences, University of Papua New Guinea, Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea;
6*78cg Io 3
H)kwQRfu International Center for Advancement of Rural Eye Care,
P64PPbP L.V. Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India; and
pP&7rRhw 4
;"5&b!=t The Fred Hollows Foundation (New Zealand), Auckland, New Zealand
@<hb6bo,N Key words:
+SR+gE\s0 blindness
&
p ,
/$Nsd cataract
2j[=\K] ,
H(ARw'M Papua New Guinea
oGnSPI5KGC ,
cJ=6r
: surgery
]nn98y+ ,
V(I8=rVH vision impairment
{I%cxQ#y .
@1roe
G I
(
Y[Q, NTRODUCTION
`,<
B
Cu Just north of Australia, tropical Papua New Guinea (PNG)
&-)N' has more than five million people spread across several major
<
44G]eb and hundreds of other smaller islands. Almost 50% of the
e8a+2.!&\ land area is mountainous, and 85% of inhabitants are rural
Woym/[i dwellers. Forty per cent of the population is age 14 years or
UcHJR"M~c younger, and 9% is 50 years or older.
yS'I[l 1
3qC}0CP* Papua New Guinea was administered by Australia until
ASA,{w] 1975, when independence was granted. Since that time, governance,
`Y$4 H,8L particularly budgetary, economic performance, law
_
]ipajT and justice, and development and management of basic
"%w u2%i health and other services have declined. Today, 37% of the
P/eeC" population is said to live below the poverty line, personal
)qw&%sO + and property security are problematic, and health is poor.
)mT<MkP There are significant and growing economic, health and education
b2Fe<~S{ disparities between urban and rural inhabitants.
$7ZX]%<s Papua New Guinea has one referral hospital, in Port
1.GQau~ Moresby. This has an eye clinic with one part-time and two
`*R:gE= full-time consultant ophthalmologists, and several ophthalmology
+7.',@8_V training registrars. There are also two private ophthalmologists
i[3'ec3 in the city. Elsewhere, four provincial hospitals
e X|m have eye clinics, each with one consultant ophthalmologist.
:g0zT[f One of these, supported by Christian Blind Mission and
FcU SE based at Goroka, provides an extensive outreach service.
hL{KRRf> Visiting Australian and New Zealand ophthalmology teams
[RhO$c$[\ and an outreach team from Port Moresby General Hospital
VlsnL8DV provide some 6 weeks of provincial service per year.
C_JNX9wv Cataract and its surgery account for a significant proportion
dUZ
,m9u of ophthalmic resource allocation and services delivered
zRr*7G in PNG. Although the National Department of Health keeps
VU3upy< some service-related statistics, and cataract has been considered
mz0X3 in three PNG publications of limited value (two district
{JMVV_}n service reports
<>rn
eHl8 2,3
Kn1a>fLaJ_ and a community assessment
0M[EEw3 4
`d}2O%P
), there has
2c*GuF9(0 been no systematic assessment of cataract or its surgery.
p<"m[Dt] A
64tvP^kp BSTRACT
u^ ~W+ Purpose:
N`e[:[ To determine the prevalence of visually significant
u'BaKWPS cataract, unoperated blinding cataract, and cataract surgery
[{,1=AB for those aged 50 years and over in Papua New Guinea.
o>pJPV Also, to determine the characteristics, rate, coverage and
ud('0r',D outcome of cataract surgery, and barriers to its uptake.
Y$@?.)tY Methods:
oCz/HQoBk Using the World Health Organization Rapid
K
be
C"mi Assessment of Cataract Surgical Services protocol, a population-
]c'A%:f< based cross-sectional survey was conducted in
a&? :P1$ 2005. By two-stage cluster random sampling, 39 clusters of
jse&DQ 30 people were selected. Each eye with a presenting visual
5r^
(P acuity worse than 6/18 and/or a history of cataract surgery
c]!V'#U was examined.
=t?F6)
Q Results:
Y.p;1" Of the 1191 people enumerated, 98.6% were
VI*$em O0 examined. The 50 years and older age-gender-adjusted
X"%gQ.1|{j prevalence of cataract-induced vision impairment (presenting
p4Z(^+Aa acuity less than 6/18 in the better eye) was 7.4% (95%
U 6)#}
confidence interval [CI]: 6.4, 10.2, design effect [deff]
N"ST@/j.A =
^U/O!GK 1.3).
`Urhy#LC That for cataract-caused functional blindness (presenting
7b+6%fV acuity less than 6/60 in the better eye) was 6.4% (95% CI:
5|)W.*Q 5.1, 7.3, deff
^S; -fYW2 =
zfdl
45 1.1). The latter was not associated with
2&cT~ZX&' gender (
#GFr`o0$^ P
Wx#;E9=Im =
JW&gJASGC 0.6). For the sample, Cataract Surgical Coverage
+lTq^4 at 6/60 was 34.5% for Eyes and 45.3% for Persons. The
n+R7D.<q!! Cataract Surgical Rate for Papua New Guinea was less than
'Pbr
v 500 per million population per year. The age-genderadjusted
m4Zk\,1m.| prevalence of those having had cataract surgery
B#R|*g:x was 8.3% (95% CI: 6.6, 9.8, deff
N$tGQ@
=
"J1
4C9u
1.3). Vision outcomes of
fV~[;e;U. surgery did not meet World Health Organization guidelines.
!
dgNtI@ Lack of awareness was the most common reason for not
Gq P5Kx+= seeking and undergoing surgery.
/mZE/>&~, Conclusion:
!5N.B|Nt Increasing the quantity and quality of cataract
|':{lH6+1 surgery need to be priorities for Papua New Guinea eye
'N(R_q6MW care services.
D6Wa.,r Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 881
eJX#@`K © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
3(UVg!t This paper reports the cataract-related aspects of a population-
H;"4C8K7 based cross-sectional rapid assessment survey of
ajpXL those 50 years and older in PNG.
#LNED)Vg M
y_[vr:s5pG ETHODS
E(|>Ddv B& The National Ethical Clearance Committee of The Medical
8b=_Y;
Research Advisory Committee granted ethics approval to
DaVa} survey aspects of eye health and care in Papua New Guinea
!_(Tqyg& (MRAC No. 05/13). This study was performed between
#A.@i+Zv December 2004 and March 2005, and used the validated
fc@A0Hf World Health Organization (WHO) Rapid Assessment of
WF"k[2 Cataract Surgical Services
LgYq.>Nl9 5,6
-F>jIgeC2v protocol. Characterization of
:@&/kyGH cataract and its surgery in the 50 years and over age group
dqAw5[qMJ was part of that study.
-{A<.a3P}= As reported elsewhere,
|cY`x(?yP 7
C7?/%7{ the sample size required, using a
w#J2 wS prevalence of bilateral cataract functional blindness (presenting
0BsYavCR visual acuity worse than 6/60 in both eyes) of 5% in the
E)3NxmM# target population, precision of
9>$p ±
L=h'Qgk% 20%, with 95% confidence
H']+L~j intervals (CI), and a design effect (deff) of 1.3 (for a cluster
<7$1kGlA size of 30 persons), was estimated as 1169 persons. The
]R? 4{t4 sample frame used for the survey, based on logistics and
uVU)d1N security considerations, included Koki wanigela settlement
Ct|A:/z( in the Port Moresby area (an urban population), and Rigo
ze;KhUPRm coastal district (a rural population, effectively isolated from
=":,.Ttq41 Port Moresby despite being only 2–4 h away by road). From
::F|8 this sample frame, 39 clusters (with probability proportionate
J.
@9zA& to population size) were chosen, using a systematic random
cGD(.= sampling strategy.
,=N.FS Within each cluster, the supervisor chose households
Cls%M5MH using a random process. Residency was defined as living in
'3H_
wd that cluster household for 6 months or more over the past
vcd\GN*4f year, and sharing meals from a common kitchen with other
PxE3K-S)G members of the household. Eligible resident subjects aged
#o2[hibq 50 years and older were then enumerated by trained volunteers
'%`:+]! from the Port Moresby St John Ambulance Services.
,?XCyHSgWW This continued until 30 subjects were enrolled. If the
3[f):
u3" required number of subjects was not obtained from a particular
bs'n+:X` cluster, the fieldworkers completed enrolment in the
O| hpXkV nearest adjacent cluster. Verbal informed consent was
xP,hTE obtained prior to all data collection and examinations.
V470C@ A standardized survey record was completed for each
Xs?o{]Fe participant. The volunteers solicited demographic and general
C'X!\}f.b/ information, and any history of cataract surgery. They
}iuw5dik+ also measured visual acuity. During a methodology pilot in
k#rBB the Morata settlement area of Port Moresby, the kappa statistic
Wxe0IXq3Nn for agreement between the four volunteers designated
BVO<e \>3 to perform visual acuity estimations was over 0.85.
+ ?!(G}5 The widely accepted and used ‘presenting distance visual
IN G@B#Cl acuity’ (with correction if the subject was using any), a measure
N8FF3}>
g of ocular condition and access to and uptake of eye care
D5HZ2cz|a services, was determined for each eye separately. This was
#N cK
X done in daylight, using Snellen illiterate E optotypes, with
uRr o?m< four correct consecutive or six of eight showings of the
$p?
aVO smallest discernible optotype giving the level. For any eye
!I
Qck8Y with presenting visual acuity worse than 6/18, pinhole acuity
`$C
n~dT was also measured.
y;H-m>*% An ophthalmologist examined all eyes with a history of
9p2&)kb6 cataract surgery and/or reduced presenting vision. Assessment
>
"=>3 of the anterior segment was made using a torch and
3kMf!VL loupe magnification. In a dimly lit room, through an undilated
7x4PaX( pupil, the status of the visually important central lens
46&/geh
r was determined with a direct ophthalmoscope. An intact red
Tyf`j,= reflex was considered indicative of a ‘normal’ clear central
p"ZG%Ow5Q] lens. The presence of obvious red reflex dark shading, but
OH(waKq2I transparent vitreous, was recorded as lens opacity. Where
%n: k# present, aphakia and pseudophakia with and without posterior
e&aWq@D capsule opacification were noted. The lens was determined
Da&]y
to be not visible if there were dense corneal opacities
exUu7&*: or other ocular pathologies, such as phthisis bulbi, precluding
^RtIh-Z.9 any view of the lens. The posterior segment was examined
` v@m-j6 with a direct ophthalmoscope, also through an
?'{SX9 undilated pupil.
HqT#$}rv A cause of vision loss was determined for each eye with
+s DV~\Vu a presenting visual acuity worse than 6/18. In the absence of
&AbNWtCV+G any other findings, uncorrected refractive error was considered
J,y[[CdH` to be that cause if the acuity then improved to better
@8r pD"x than 6/18 with pinhole. Other causes, including corneal
X=fYWj[H, opacity, cataract and diabetic retinopathy, required clinical
8i#2d1O findings of sufficient magnitude to explain the level of vision
!\.pq 2 loss. Although any eye may have more than one condition
R3&Iu=g contributing to vision reduction, for the purposes of this
!_'ur>iR study, a single cause of vision loss was determined for each
*VhL\IjN] eye. The attributed cause was the condition most easily
"N bq#w\ treated if each of the contributing conditions was individually
UIN<2F_ treatable to a vision of 6/18 or better. Thus, for example,
G.a b ql when uncorrected refractive error and lens opacity coexisted,
dufu|BL|} refractive error, with its easier and less expensive treatment,
co|aC!7 was nominated as the cause. Where treatment of a condition
Mc_YPR:C present would not result in 6/18 or better acuity, it was
s/ qYa]) determined to be the cause rather than any coincident or
ryUQU^v associated conditions amenable to treatment. Thus, for
3/e.38m| example, coincident retinal detachment and cataract would
J({Xg? be categorized as ‘posterior segment pathology’.
tKx~1- Participants who were functionally blind (less than 6/60
&n
}f? in the better eye) because of unoperated cataract were interrogated
dkBIx$t about the reasons for not having surgery. The
{|_M
#w~& responses were closed ended and respondents had the option
j<jN05p of volunteering more than one barrier, all of which were
rt~d6|6 recorded in a piloted proforma. The first four reasons offered
zFws:_ i were considered for analysis of the barriers to cataract
Ed,~1GanY surgery.
1&evG-#<: Those eyes previously operated for cataract were examined
ujq=F to characterize that surgery and the vision outcome. A
Eo
g0TQ+* detailed history of the surgery was taken. This included the
uHvp;]/0\ age at surgery, place of surgery, cost and the use of spectacles
~>Fu5i $i afterward, including reasons for not wearing them if that was
[{<`o5qR the case.
u#;7<.D The Rapid Assessment of Cataract Surgical Services data
T?soJ]A entry and analysis software package was used. The prevalences
E+R1 !. of visually significant cataract, unoperated blinding
i6tf2oqO7 cataract and cataract surgery were determined. Where prevalence
~tUl} estimates were age and gender adjusted for the population
eH3JyzzP, of PNG, the estimated population structure for the
NI}yVV 882 Garap
)=Z>#iH1 et al.
N~d ?WD\^ © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
?{|q5n year 2000
T/Gz94c 1
~u
!|qM was used, and 95% CI were derived around these
6]_pIf point estimates. Additional analysis for potential associations
#!qm ZN of cataract, its surgery and surgical outcomes employed the
7>|J8*/Nd STATA (version 8.0; StataCorp LP, TX, USA). Fisher’s exact
*:YiimOY" test and the chi-square test for bivariate analysis and a multiple
EXwo,?I logistic regression model for multivariate analysis were
goRL1L,5 used. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% CI were estimated. A
iNz=e=+Si P
7 60Y$/Wz -
:q7Wy&ow value of
5C*Pd
Wpl <
VT%NO'0 0.05 was taken as significant for this analysis.
*@r/5pM2} The Cataract Surgical Coverage (Eyes) (CSC(Eyes)) was
+L|?~p`V calculated. This is a surgical service impact indicator. It measures
[f-?ymmT the proportion of cataract that has been operated on
0r] t `{H in a defined population at a particular point in time, being
E7 Ul;d
the eyes having had cataract surgery as a percentage of the
p8H'{f\G combined total of all of those eyes operated with those
u+e{Mim currently blind (less than 6/60) from cataract (CSC(Eyes) at
qu6D 5t 6/60
uR4z&y =
C8:f_mJU 100
,GIyq) a
o>i4CCU+ /(
]G=L=D^cK a
IH&|Tcf\ +
Rz:]\jcIT/ b
x0D*U?A ), where
)0W{]2 a
m@F`!qY~Y\ =
T_
<@..C pseudophakic
#PW9:_BE +
]e^&aR5f" aphakic eyes,
3`|@H-c9 and
0c]/bs{} b
,vawzq[oSy =
a=1@*ID eyes with worse than 6/60 vision caused by cataract).
=.U[$~3q% 8
Zw9FJ/Zn@ The Cataract Surgical Coverage (Persons) (CSC(Persons))
:zbQD8jv was determined. This considers people with operated
XS{Qnx_# cataract (either or both eyes) as a proportion of those having
mh#a#< operable cataract. (CSC(Persons) at 6/60
W:nef<WH =
q5+4S5R*^ 100(
I)[DTCJ~ x
LEf^cM=> +
X-K
h(Z y
n\'4 )/
EGS)b (
g%I"U>!2 x
pRpBhm;iJ +
KC6.Fr{ y
UHkMn +
UnV.~ u~ z
<2x^slx)? ), in which
Pn1^NUMZJ x
Rsk4L0 =
HM1Fz\Sf persons with unilateral pseudophakia
&`r-.&Y or unilateral aphakia and worse than 6/60 vision
0i>5<ej,f caused by cataract in the other eye,
hWLA<wdb y
pE0Sw}A:9 =
^
VyKd persons with bilateral
3(N$nsi previously operated cataract, and
P3=G1=47U z
4E+e}\r:6 =
V)k4:H persons with bilateral
Qd{CMmx cataract causing vision worse than 6/60 in each).
my1@41
H 8
3;9^ The Cataract Surgical Rate, being the number of cataract
4F:\-O
operations per year per million of population, was also
T&bYa`f] estimated.
/36:ms A R
{}przrU^c ESULTS
Ll't>) Of the 1191 people enumerated, 5 subjects were not available
9W5lSX
#^; during the survey and 12 refused participation. Data
eo?bL$A[s from these 17 were not considered in the analysis. Of the
_jVN&\A]mC remaining 1174 (98.6%), 606 (51.6%) were female, and 914
>]TWXmx/w (77.9%) were domiciled in rural Rigo.
rs[T=C Q Cataract caused 35.2% of vision impairment (presenting
1CZgb vision less than 6/18) and 62.8% of functional blindness
]%H`_8<gc (presenting vision less than 6/60) in the 2348 eyes sampled
cuIT
Y^6 (Table 1). It was second to refractive error (45.7%)
/,yd+wcW# 7
T!#GW/? in the
r l% former, and the leading cause of the latter.
wwZ ,;\ For the 1174 subjects, cataract was the most prevalent
#c!lS<z cause of vision impairment (46.7%) and functional blindness
$6 f3F?y7 (75.0%) (Table 1). On bivariate analysis, increasing age
{!L~@r (
:5<UkN)R( P
$UWZDD <
n 7[V&`e_ 0.001), illiteracy (
lL3U8}vn P
CA~-rv <
73;GW4, 0.001) and unemployment
>
kVz49j (
a`>B Ly5o P
/J;Kn]5e <
#*Ctwl,T 0.001) were associated with cataract-induced functional
wmLs/:~ blindness. Gender was not significantly associated (
} q8ASYNc P
Q![@c =
~9@UjQ^)F 0.6).
b]KBgZ In a multivariate model that included all variables found
FZnw0tMq significant in bivariate analysis, increasing age (reference category
` Sz}`+E 50–59 years; OR: 2.6, 95% CI: 1.6, 5.9 for persons
@j/a=4o[ aged 60–69, OR: 9.8, 95% CI: 4.6, 20.6 for persons aged
+M/%+l 70–79, and OR: 18.6, 95% CI: 8.3, 41.9 for persons aged
i/Zd8+.n$ 80 years and older) and illiteracy (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.3, 3.8)
wibNQ`4k were associated with functional cataract blindness.
|sE'XT4ag The survey sample included 97 people (8.3%) who had
3bI9Zt#J%& previously undergone cataract surgery, for a total of 136 eyes
abVmkdP_s (5.8%). On bivariate analysis, increasing age (
W"{N Bi P
Z%UP6% =
8}:nGK|kx 0.02), male
V0mn4sfs gender (
*vMn$,^0h9 P
dM@1l1h/ =
@H8EWTZ 0.02), literacy (
!&E-}}< P
8&dF <
J'r^/ 0.001) and employed status
F!K>K z (
\i&<s; P
U6s[`H3I{ =
`Pnoxm' 0.03) were associated with cataract surgery. Illiteracy
dj%!I:Q>u was significantly associated with reduced uptake of cataract
#g!.T g' surgery (adjusted OR 0.43, 95% CI: 0.20, 0.91) in a multivariate
Ax}JLPz5' model that adjusted for age, gender and employment
j] [,J49L status.
f*8DCh!r" The CSC(Eyes) at 6/60 for the survey sample was
3Zh)]^ 34.5%, and the CSC(Persons) at the same vision level was
BJ(M
2|VH 45.3%.
=2x^nW Most cataract surgery occurred in a government hospital
RD&PDXT4 (
Ek}A]zC P
gQ.Sa
j
$ <
}ad|g6i` 0.001), more than 5 years ago (
8dhUBJ0_ P
i}?>g -( <
0m ? )ROaJ 0.001). Also, most
zx7{U8*`< of the intracapsular extractions were performed more than
T[A69O]v 5 years ago (
{l>hMxij P
E4xa[iZ <
PUX;I0Cf 0.001). Patients are now more likely to
)dSi/ receive intraocular lens surgery (
EJ@ ~/)< P
W@!S%Y9 <
Q NVa?'0"Y 0.001). Although most
wlmRe`R surgery was provided free (
~u+9J} P
TuqH*{NNy9 =
:eLVC7' 0.02), males, who were more
&
ZB likely to have surgery (
;jTN| i' P
6S\8$ =
>@AB<$A 0.02), were also more likely to
ei5~& pay for it (
uSBaDYg P
W`*r>`krVJ =
*4_Bd=5(U 0.03) (Table 2).
HE_8(Ms;8 As measured by presenting acuity, the vision outcomes of
e(8Ba X_ both intracapsular surgery and intraocular lens surgery were
wn)W
?P;k poor (Table 3). However, 62.6% of those people with at least
{cw /!B Table 1.
f'3$9x Vision impairment and blindness by eye and person; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
$
o#V# Category 2348 eyes/1174 people surveyed
;P&OX5~V Vision impairment Blindness
B^jc3 VsR Eye (presenting
m<2M4u visual acuity less than 6/18)
9]o-O]7/ Person (presenting visual
MR.'t9m2L acuity less than 6/18 in the
zs#@j v$ better eye)
&XUiKnNW Eye (presenting visual
Nu~lsWyRI5 acuity less than 6/60)
%BB%pC Person (presenting visual
}f7j8py acuity less than 6/60 in the
2gVm9gAHUd better eye)
94
90o:s Total Cataract Total Cataract Total Cataract Total Cataract
i8HTzv"J n
1D!<'`)AY %
K@w{"7} n
fL7xq$K %
pIKP
XqA n
_ZkI)o %
/fV;^=:8c n
@bP)406p %
CYYU7 n
fw{gx %
c6]D-YNFG n
\v)+.m?n %
Qv
/=&_6 n
0'?L#K %
$z*'fXg n
WaR`Kp+> %
XA
L1|]S 50–59 years 266 27.9 49 14.6 84 22.8 23 13.4 74 18.0 37 14.3 17 14.2 10 11.1
K:30_l< 60–69 years 298 31.3 93 27.8 121 32.9 50 29.1 119 29.0 67 26.0 31 25.8 18 20.0
@/-\k*T 70–79 years 252 26.5 119 35.5 106 28.8 57 33.1 133 32.4 94 36.4 42 35.0 34 37.8
tT?
cBg{ 80
%;YHt=(1*X +
m5Di
=8 years 136 14.3 74 22.1 57 15.5 42 24.4 85 20.6 60 23.3 30 25.0 28 31.1
)~ h} Male 467 49.1 157 46.9 180 48.9 77 44.8 203 49.4 123 47.7 59 49.2 41 45.6
[Nbm|["q~ Female 485 50.9 178 53.1 188 51.1 95 55.2 208 50.6 135 52.3 61 50.8 49 54.4
LOV)3{m All cases 952 100 335 35.2 368 100 172 46.7 411 100 258 62.8 120 100 90 75
?"g2v-jTK Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 883
Z^MNf © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
cY. bO/&l one eye operated on for cataract felt that their uncorrected
L AAHEv vision, using either or both eyes, was sufficiently good that
dQR-H7U spectacles were not required (Table 3).
@A^;jk ‘Lack of awareness of cataract and the possibility of surgery’
2'MZ s]??w was the most common (50.1%) reason offered by 90
7,9=uk>0\ cataract-induced functionally blind individuals for not seeking
m<"WDU?y; and undergoing cataract surgery. Males were more likely
^iw'^6~ to believe that they could not afford the surgery (P = 0.02),
a8Nh=^Py and females were more frequently afraid of undergoing a
ptxbDzOz cataract extraction (P = 0.03) (Table 4).
bTs?!~q DISCUSSION
5>N2:9We The limitations of the standardized rapid assessment methodology
CDR@
`1- used for this study are discussed elsewhere.7 Caution
b9<#K+L- should be exercised when extrapolating this survey’s
RcU}}V Table 2. Circumstances of cataract surgery; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
!.(P~j][ Category 136 cataract surgeries
{w^+\]tC Male Female Aphakia
Z+. '> (n = 74)
!*bMa8]* Pseudophakia
s6.M \^ (n = 60)
^mO~W
!" Couched
90*5
5\>{ (n = 2)
NDlF0f Male, n (%) 83 (61.0) 45 (60.8) 38 (63.3) 0 (0.0)
P?B;_W+~A. Female, n (%) 53 (39.0) 29 (39.2) 22 (36.7) 2 (100)
-^h' >. Undergone surgery in the last 5 years, n (%) 19 (22.9) 20 (37.7) 10 (13.5) 29 (48.3) 0 (0.0)
-0{r>,&Mm Range of age at the time of surgery, years 39–84 40–87 39–87 45–85 52
aYS!xh206 Age at the time of surgery, years, mean ± SD 61.3 ± 9.7 60.5 ± 11.6 60.8 ± 10.6 63.4 ± 10.9 52 ± 0.0
v)t:|Q{I Surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 72 (86.7) 44 (83.0) 63 (85.1) 53 (88.3) 0 (0.0)
MUREiL9L| Surgery in a private hospital, n (%) 10 (12.1) 7 (13.2) 10 (13.5) 7 (11.7) 0 (0.0)
f"SD/]q- Surgery in an eye camp, n (%) 1 (1.2) 0 (0.0) 1 (1.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
![_*(8v}S Surgery by traditionalist, n (%) 0 (0.0) 2 (3.8) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 2 (100)
8xV9.4S Totally free surgery, n (%) 32 (38.6) 26 (49.1)
4;]hK!AXS Paid full price asked for surgery, n (%) 25 (30.1) 14 (26.4)
h!.^?NF Paid partial price asked for surgery, n (%) 26 (31.3) 13 (24.5)
EGzzHIZ`! Totally free surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 55 (47.4)
e2t-4}
ww Full price surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 23 (19.8)
jW3!6*93 Partially paid surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 38 (32.8)
BJsz2t :0 Table 3. Characterization of cataract surgery outcomes; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
>qjq=Ege (a) 136 cataract surgeries
+)<wDDC_ (b) 97 people with at least one eye operated on for cataract
y 4I6 (c) 67 (69.1%) cataract operated people not currently using distance correction: 38 (56.7%) male; 29 (43.3%) female
Raxrb=7 Aphakia Pseudophakia Couched
y7
3VFb n % n % n %
?Exv|e Total 74 54.4 60 44.1 2 1.5
"UG
Y2skf; Presenting vision 6/18 or better 27 36.5 24 40 0 0.0
uK$9Ll{lk Presenting vision worse than 6/60 40 54.1 11 18.3 2 100
,dov<U[ia Aphakia Pseudophakia‡ Couched
;":zkb{ Unilateral† Bilateral n % n %
-
o[x2u~n\ n % n %
?_$=l1vf Total 28 28.9 17 17.5 51 52.6 1 1.0
q<[_T Presenting vision 6/18 or better in better eye 15 53.6 11 64.7 35 68.6 0 0.0
V=qwwYz~ Presenting vision worse than 6/60 in better eye 13 46.4 3 17.6 9 17.6 1 100
qY<'<T4\ Reason n %
=Z+nz^'b Never provided 20 29.9
:xD=`ib Damaged 2 3.0
P 8>d6;o($ Lost 3 4.5
|e?64%l5P Do not need 42 62.6
`m>*d!h= †Unilateral aphakes with an unoperated contralateral eye. ‡Bilateral pseudophakes (n = 9) + those with one eye aphakic and the other
n'01Hh`0 pseudophakic (n = 12) + unilateral pseudophakes with an unoperated contralateral eye (n = 30).
OCJnjlV% 884 Garap et al.
B}:(za& © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
x&9hI results to the entire population of PNG. However, this
m&\h4$[kql study’s results are the most systematically collected and
]*F
Vz$>XM objective currently available for eye care service planning.
*R3f{/DK Based on this survey sample, the age-gender-adjusted
< hO
/jB prevalence of vision impairment from all causes for those
?-^m` 50 years and older in PNG is 29.2% (95% CI: 27.6, 35.1,
{%{`l- deff = 2.3), with 13.1% (95% CI: 11.3, 15.1, deff = 1.2) due
?)[EO(D to uncorrected refractive error.7 Cataract (7.4% [95% CI:
H5]^
6
HwX 6.4, 10.2, deff = 1.3]) is the second most frequent cause. The
+
33@?fl. adjusted prevalence for functional blindness from all causes
s]mY*@a
% in people aged 50 years and older is 8.9% (95% CI: 8.4, 12.0,
WxJf{=- deff = 1.2),7 with cataract the leading cause at 6.4% (95%
~r$jza~o( CI: 5.1, 7.3, deff = 1.1). This is typical of developing countries.
(85Fv&a However, atypically, it would seem that cataract blindness
On@<J&% in PNG is not associated with female gender.9
C,NxE5?h Assuming that ‘negligible’6 cataract blindness (less than
*gF<m9& 5% at visual acuity less than 3/60,8 although it may be as
E V^~eTz much as 10–15% at less than 6/6010) occurs in the under
YJ/zU52JK~ 50 years age group, then, based on a 2005 population estimate
R8UYP=Kp of 5.545 million, PNG would be expected to currently
~7t$MF. have 32 000 (25 000–36 000) cataract-blind people. An
T<@ cd|` additional 5000 people in the 50 years and older age group
D8nD/||;Z will have cataract-reduced vision (6/60 and better, but less
k`9)=&zX+ than 6/18), along with an unknown number under the age of
;)I'WQ]Q 50 years.
80 Y\|) The age-gender-adjusted prevalence of those 50 years
#gaQaUjR and older in PNG having had cataract surgery is 8.3% (95%
{}m PEd b CI: 6.6, 9.8, deff = 1.3). Prevalences for males and females,
e)IpPTj# respectively, are 10.2% (95% CI: 7.7, 12.7) and 6.4% (95%
Ev2HGU [ CI: 4.5, 8.4), with the expected9 association with male gender
A'K%WW*'U (age adjusted OR 1.6, 95% CI: 1.2, 2.1). Assuming negligible
L9ap( cataract surgery is performed on those under age
X _G| hx 50 years (noting mean age and age range of surgery in
I3:[= ,5 Table 2), there would be about 41 400 people in PNG today
ZBG}3Z
who have had this surgery. In the survey sample, 28.7% of
]cC[-F[ surgery occurred in the last 5 years (Table 2). Assuming that
<uk1?Qg there have been no deaths, annual surgical numbers have
Enq|Y$qm been steady during this time, and a population mean of the
N+)?$[ 2000 and 2005 estimates, this would equate to about 2400
0\~Z5k`IT people per year, being a Cataract Surgical Rate (CSR) of
%|l8f>3[ approximately 440 per million per year.
<U9/InN0[ Unfortunately, no operation numbers are available from
-/dEsgO the private Port Moresby facility, which contributed 12.5%
&Q=ZwC7# (Table 2) of the surgeries in this study. However, from
EIbXmkHl< records and estimates, outreach, government and mission
]$
b<Gs hospital surgical services perform approximately 1600 cataract
#Hh^3N surgeries per year. Excluding the private hospital, this
5ZPzPUa8~ equates to a CSR of about 300 per million population per
ExXM:1 e26 year.
s;YKeE!
8 Whatever the exact CSR, certainly less than the WHO
G>Em!4h estimate of 716,11 the order of magnitude is typical of a
<n\`d country with PNG’s medical infrastructure, resourcing and
"$5\, bureacratic capability.11 With the exception of the Christian
XfzVcap Blind Mission surgeon, who performs in excess of 1000 cases
&~f3 psA per year, PNG’s ophthalmologists operate, on average, on
Pe~`16f fewer than 100 cataracts each per year. This is also typical.6
6Bm9?eU0 It will be evident that the current surgical capability in
Qc{RaMwD PNG is insufficient to address the cataract backlog. The
E}Xka1 Bn CSC(Persons) of 45.3%, relating directly to the prevalence
cQZ652F9 of bilateral cataract blindness, and CSC(Eyes) of 34.5%,
"x&C5l}n relating to the total surgical workload, are in keeping with
]`w}+B'/ other developing countries.6,8,10 If an annual cataract blindness
f|a DTWF incidence of 20% of prevalence12 is accepted, and surgery
j%*7feSNC is only performed on one eye of each person, then 6400
h#Ce
_,o (5000–7200) surgeries need to be performed annually to meet
6j8<Q 2
this. While just addressing the incidence, in time the backlog
IdRdW{o will reduce to near zero. This would require a three- or
#G,XDW2"w fourfold increase in CSR, to about 1200. Despite planning
lg:y|@Y'' for this and the best of intentions, given current circumstances
=ziy`#fm, in PNG, this seems unlikely to occur in the near future.
JK~ m(oQ Increasing the output of surgical services of itself will be
{rkn q_;0 insufficient to reduce cataract-related blindness. As measured
oBlzHBn>0 by presenting acuity, the outcome of cataract surgery is poor
L]
2<&%N2 (Table 3). Neither the historical intracapsular or current
WY)^1Gb$ux intraocular lens surgical techniques approach WHO outcome
.)8 guidelines of more than 80% with 6/18 and better
Wc#:f8dr presenting vision, and less than 5% presenting functionally
eZO9GMO blind.13 Better outcomes are required to ensure scarce
?:|YGLaB Table 4. Reasons that cataract-blind (worse than 6/60) people do not seek or undergo cataract surgery; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea
jgvh[@uB? (2005)
! VRI_c 90 people functionally blind due to cataract
Q.(51]' Responses by 41
^w6eWzI males (45.6%)
Y%vP#>h Responses by 49
U
%:c],Fk females (54.4%)
12r` ) Responses by all
T~Y g5J n % n % n %
.wFU:y4r Lack of awareness of cataract and the possibility of surgery 18 43.9 28 57.1 46 50.1
REx[`x,GUh Too old to do anything about vision 7 17.1 6 12.2 13 14.4
cy:;)E>/ Believes unable to afford surgery 10 24.4 7 14.3 17 18.9
ofEqvoi@ No time available to attend surgery 4 9.8 6 12.2 10 11.1
l/ V&s< Waiting for cataract to mature 4 9.8 5 10.2 9 10.0
|z7dRDU}] None available to accompany person to surgery 4 9.8 2 4.1 6 6.7
nJ# XVlHc Fear of the surgery 2 4.9 6 12.2 8 8.9
V/
UB9)i+ Believes no services available 2 4.9 2 4.1 4 4.4
g@(30{ Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 885
*7vue"I*Z © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
.xv^G?GG resources are well used.14 Routine monitoring of surgical
],V
kp activity and outcome, perhaps more likely to occur if done
U5wTGv4S| manually, may contribute to an improvement.15,16 So too
HU3Vv<lz would better patient selection, as many currently choose not
er\:U0fr#@ to wear postoperation correction because they see well
M7H~;S\3IM enough with the fellow eye (Table 3). Improving access to
Alh?0 Fk3) refraction and spectacles will also likely improve presenting
(E]"Srwh acuities (Table 3).
Cs;<'[_?YO Of those cataract blind in the survey, 50.1% claimed to
#y`k$20" be unaware of cataract and the possibility of surgery
'!j(u@&! (Table 4). However, even when arrangements, including
|x[$3R1@ transportation, were made for study participants with visually
h&'J+b significant cataract to have surgery in Port Moresby, not
pgfu+K7?w all availed themselves of this opportunity. The reasons for
H.;yLL= this need further investigation.
n=SzF(S[M Despite the apparent ignorance of cataract among the
8|_K population, there would seem little point in raising demand
gNi}EP5> and expectations through health promotion techniques until
0<"tl0p_ such time as the capacity of services and outcomes of surgery
nR#a)et have been improved. Increasing the quantity and quality of
)da:&F - cataract surgery need to be priorities for PNG eye care
|3W3+Rn! services. The independent Christian Blind Mission Goroka
qFGB'mIrFz and outreach services, using one surgeon and a wellresourced
%L.rcbg:<c support team, are examples of what is possible,
>fhSaeN both in output and in outcome. However, the real challenge
+;5Wp$M\ is to be able to provide cataract surgery as an integrated part
@<%oIE~]F of a functioning service offering equitable access to good eye
k.h^ $f health and vision outcomes, from within a public health
&?fvt
system that needs major attention. To that end, registrar
Y~}QJ+`? training and referral hospital facilities and practice are being
)SC`6(GW improved.
^S:cNRSW" It may be that the required cataract service improvements
e*6U |+kJ are beyond PNG’s under-resourced and managed public
fjF!>Dy
health system. The survey reported here provides a baseline
K7y!s :rg! against which progress may be measured.
dW:w<{a!R ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
&8o : The authors thankfully acknowledge the technical support
:tg@HyY) provided by Renee du Toit and Jacqui Ramke (The International
o$^O<z L Centre for Eyecare Education), Doe Kwarara (FHFPNG
n+:m_2T Eye Care Program) and David Pahau (Eye Clinic, Port
,7WK<0
Moresby General Hospital). Thanks also to the St Johns
BvNl?A@]A Ambulance Services (Port Moresby) volunteers and staff for
)@sJTAK their invaluable contribution to the fieldwork. This survey
\a9D[wk;@ was funded in part by a program grant from New Zealand
a)YJ4\Qg[ Agency for International Development (NZAID) to The
58a)&s[+ Fred Hollows Foundation (New Zealand).
&/z+A{Hi REFERENCES
(xjoRbU* 1. National Statistical Office, Government of the Independent
'2Mjz6mBDA State of PNG. Papua New Guinea 2000 Census. Port Moresby:
>e5q2U PNG Government, 2000.
7TMDZ* 2. Parsons G. Ophthalmic practice in Papua New Guinea. PNG
\#IJ=+z Med J 1975; 18: 79–82.
"^e}
C@ 3. Parsons G. A decade of ophthalmic statistics in Papua New
&Sa_%:*D( Guinea. PNG Med J 1991; 34: 255–61.
@U 7#, G 4. Dethlefs R. The trachoma status and blindness rates of selected
c,{& areas of Papua New Guinea in 1979–80. Aust J Ophthalmol 1982;
Up
E1PLZlB 10: 13–18.
62k9"xSH 5. WHO. Rapid assessment of cataract surgical services. In: Vision
+S:u[x 2020: The Right to Sight: Developing an Action Plan Version 2 CDROM.
Wfi:wCqZG World Health Organization and International Agency
rTm>8et for the Prevention of Blindness, 2004. Available from: http://
|zRoXO`]-* www.who.int/ncd/vision2020_actionplan/documents/raccs/ Q
T0IW(A installation_racss.htm
d=c1WK 6. Amansakhatov S, Volokhovskaya ZP, Afanasyeva AN, Limburg
*h5ld P H. Cataract blindness in Turkmenistan: results of a national
K"t
:B survey. Br J Ophthalmol 2002; 86: 1207–10.
h~^qG2TYWq 7. Garap JN, Sheeladevi S, Shamanna BR et al. Blindness and
b>>=d)R vision impairment in the elderly of Papua New Guinea. Clin
leX7(Y;!a7 Experiment Ophthalmol 2006; 34: 335–41.
It!.*wp 8. Limburg H, Foster A. Cataract surgical coverage: an indicator
I1}{~@ to measure the impact of cataract intervention programmes.
X<@y*?D9D Community Eye Health J 1998; 11: 3–6.
}fa%JN %E 9. Lewallen S, Courtright P. Gender and use of cataract surgical
`hQ!*f6 services in developing countries. Bull World Health Organ 2002;
VU g~[
80: 300–3.
>R'VY "\ 10. Bassett KL, Noertjojo K, Liu L et al. Cataract surgical coverage
D/%b@Ls2ze and outcome in the Tibet Autonomous Region of China. Br J
bCac.x#jo Ophthalmol 2005; 89: 5–9.
U
K]{ ]- 11. WHO. State of the World’s Sight: Vision 2020: The Right to Sight:
LBiv]3 1999–2005. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2005.
`'WY'\|C 12. WHO. How to plan cataract intervention in a district. In: Vision
si"mM>e 2020: The Right to Sight: Developing an Action Plan Version 2 CDROM.
`QyALcO
World Health Organization and International Agency
S
tp*JU for the Prevention of Blindness, 2004. Available from: http://
z6>ZV6(d2^ www.who.int/ncd/vision2020_actionplan/contents/4.1.htm l4B O@ 13. WHO. Informal Consultation on Analysis of Blindness Prevention Outcomes.
dxhjPS~^Q WHO/PBL/98.68. Geneva: World Health Organization,
/IQ-|Qkg 1998.
Le$u$ulS 14. Brian G, Ramke J, Szetu J et al. Towards standards of outcome
3~1lVU: quality: a protocol for the surgical treatment of cataract in
(A<sFw? developing countries. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2006; 34: 383–
a^)4q\E 7.
"GC]E8&>H 15. Yorston D, Gichuhi S, Wood M et al. Does prospective monitoring
?0)XS< improve cataract surgery outcomes in Africa? Br J Ophthalmol
tH|Q4C 2002; 86: 543–7.
QT&Ws+@
s{ 16. Limburg H. Monitoring cataract surgical outcomes: methods
j
&[WE7wf and tools. Community Eye Health J 2002; 15: 51–3.