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 P@-R5 GK  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes RNl\`>Cz  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to B0NN>)h  
unoperated cataract in Australia. Ds;Rb6WcnY  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual Z,(%v.d  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than d+1L5}Jn  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination pC55Ec<  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography U_.n=d~B  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who @m }rQT  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater 8UjCX[v  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or z[_R"+   
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. Xt nIK  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne q\-xg*'  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 ^Osd/g  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria 1"*Nb5s  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract  m,xy4  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had >Lo6='G  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 2{ jtQlc  
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber ]Hv*^Bak  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber 9F-ViDI.  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated Cnb[t[hk+j  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or D>!v_v6  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven P\Pc/[ Z7  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate h7Shl<f  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery 0KNH=;d}  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% b{9HooQ{  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone m bB\~n  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an >=]NO'?O  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision {HE.mHy  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no }lr fO_  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural g,{Ei]$>I  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance #lLn='4  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated 7csl1|U  
cataract. @$N*lrM2  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is V2<k0@y  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced 7Vof7Y <  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of Bm2}\KOI  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes )f_"`FH0d  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. AQ_#uxI'oa  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health ;Wp`th!F  
services accessibility, prevalence hVQ+ J!qD  
INTRODUCTION !:!@dC%8_  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in rE' %MiIK  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all ^LQ lfd  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate Qnu&GBM  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be O#89M%  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 6iA c@  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting pCud` :o"  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is >GF(.:7  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in HS| g   
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists 'yAoZ P\|  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather DI cyXZH<  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral bNPjefBF  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has 1:~m)"?I_^  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for KE|u}M@v6  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has +cplM5X  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 vp}>#&  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is = ;-ju@d  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the 5a/ A_..+I  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract '\vmfp =  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence #I@[^^Vw  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors e+=G-u5}-  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to !j\&BAxTEk  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. T>:g ME  
METHODS %:8q7PN|  
Study population n<(5B|~y  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual U3R`mHr0  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 d'@H@  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to Fl|&eO,e  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. ,Z\,IRn  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of !z6/.>QJ~  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen t6>Q e  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites d4=u`2w  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. 5r}(|86O/  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 K#pt8Q  
Original Article ve/6-J!5Y.  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia hI#M {cz  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD sf&K<C](  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia x?& xz;  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, T%vbD*nt.  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au DB= cc  
78 McCarty et al. vT<wd#  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural >Zp]vK~s  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural qk{UO <  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify -`1L[-<d=/  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a z_0lMX`  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of \$Qm2XKrK  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, ^)]*10  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of %cif0Td   
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. hl ~F1"q )  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local B{i;+[ase  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. 4sgwQ$m)  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian S#z8H+'  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. 31\^9w__8  
Assessment of cataract xE[tD? M{  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after S; <?nz3  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine oD2;Tdk  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the &H>dE]Hq,  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using j %0_!*#3  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and Qz$Dv@*y\  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on uzA'D~)P  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) DfFPGFv  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, z=pV{ '  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, (6^k;j  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than pU'sADC  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to ^$ bhmJYT  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual ;MI<J>s  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, n?tAa|_  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. <TuSU[]  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to J>PV{N  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the =^M t#h."  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight B+ sqEj-  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the !AHm+C_=Lg  
analyses. jU~%5R  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., RV(z>XM  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in 0-HE, lv  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. K),wAZI!7j  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman DyZ90]N  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph \LXC269  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were qm8RRDG  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera A 6L}5#7-  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 lukV G2wDL  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately /GaR&  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated r&DK> H  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies /XB1U[b  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were  <k5~z(  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, W'$~mK\  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph #!Fs[A5%  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical d:''qgz`  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) q4N$.hpb  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to Yv-uC}e  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. uBgHtjmae  
Assessment of risk factors ZZ5yu* &  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information ](D [T  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 ja2]VbB  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration W =m_G]"L  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, ENzeVtw0  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension 5KSsRq/8"  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and IM/\t!*7  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were BKEB,K=K@  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to < lrw7T  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants !@X#{  
and use of vitamin supplements. OUPpz_y  
Data management and statistical analysis V2.K*CpZ7  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a s@|?N+z  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, u4'Lm+&O  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or );[`rXH_  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at 4$"Lf'sH6  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms :\Z0^{  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and Yy}aQF#M  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency T9^i#8-^  
checks were performed on the entire data set. )94R\ f  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was ORoraEK  
employed for statistical analyses. h(sD]N  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific "n:9JqPb  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to P dJ*'@~i  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five pLU>vQA  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates L!Ro`6|7;  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific w  <ID<  
data were weighted according to the 1996 k#.co~kS  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the QEPmuG  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. /iK )tl|X  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared  ;P_Zen  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated SXL6)pX  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted 0-9&d(L1g  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the Oq("E(z+f  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. Xw% z #6l  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically l>ttxYBa<d  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use NJp;t[v.^  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The sDiYm}W  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment `y\:3bQ4  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with S92Dvw?  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence zehF/HBzE  
limits. +G~b-}  
RESULTS 4c% :?H@2  
Study population S:d` z'  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 !qR(Rn  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) !|!V}O  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did rLnu\X=h$  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was 09"~<W8  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as )fa  
a whole. + $-a:zx`l  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to 7XY C.g  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The d_`Ze.^   
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to Q6BW ax|  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural `{/=i|6  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) SbZk{lWcq  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. b{oNV-<&{  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery E'ZWSpP  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases p|((r?{  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any _EY :vv  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). f|`{P P`\  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three \DHCf 4,  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence >GcFk&x  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes %:y-"m1\u$  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% {R#nGsrt;  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract n Au>i<  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract |\ ay^@N  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall }$o%^ "[  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was j7W_%Yk|E  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). ;)kB J @  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract ^R\blJQ<^  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified &M2x`  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated QdRMp n}q  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents brFOQU?  
as information about risk factor exposure was not n`hSn41A  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed JdAjKN  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence vr;7p[~  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic O e#k|  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a q^Z\V?  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use |joGrWv4  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private wHCsEp(  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, iN><m|  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. / [19ITZ  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the [L275]4n!]  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having NUU}8a(K  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract _#+9)*A  
surgery were not available. lC2xl(#!  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate OlK2< <  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had LY >JE6zTt  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been &A9+%kOk>  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment N+tS:$V  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant [brrziZ  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression 4 A<c@g2  
model. The factors that remained significantly related r~;N(CG  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever w" e2}iE7  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been Jq!($PdA  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors f6#H@ X  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate -7`J(f.rYC  
model. k (R4-"@  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract X*~YCF[_  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with HI?>]zz|  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 #7>CLjI  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort )Ga6O2 :  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total o i?ak  
(years) (%) (%) (%) l\5 NuCgRY  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) 9p.>L8  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) <ZiO[dEV  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) m|k,8guG  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) -FI1$  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) +D@R'$N  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) jt3SA [cy  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) -'(:Sq,4o  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) GZ={G2@=I  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) q mB@kbt  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) by<2hLB9Q  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) e#('`vGB  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) NO$Nl/XM  
Age-standardized 0#JBz\  
(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) NSq"\A\  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 mAzW'Q4D  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% 2Kidbf  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, [OcD#~drO  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). {aSq3C<r  
Outcomes of cataract surgery f"Iyo:Wt  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior <G >PPf}  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were Fo#*_y5\  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular ^Ram8fW  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular 0"`skYJ@  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact m 5Kx}H~  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of #7=LI\  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected 0=B5 =qyw  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% Vz*'^=(o&  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes KfNXX>'  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, 9YABr> ?  
P = 0.027). B }X#oA  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity 9:o3JGHSc  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without Xdt+ \}\  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract ([~`{,sv  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, 27:x5g?  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the Oe`t!&v  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 7 w,FA  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this U5"OhI  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four Hea<!zPH  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these E6M: ^p*<  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction 8BDL{?Mu  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one dL(|Y{4  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract q;.]e#wvh  
surgery. 46Nf|~  
DISCUSSION 6l'y  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically ->=++  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract uszSFe]E  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes -QDgr`%5  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual uW=NH;u  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and C&kl*nO  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is !`o:+Gg@  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, nD\os[ 3  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract 0z7mre^Q  
services throughout Australia. 7G/|e24  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age GK? R76d  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is pVS2dwBqE  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous !!%[JR)cS  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye a] =\h'S  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract 5l0rw)  
between studies because of different methodologies and } <4[(N  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well ok%!o+n k.  
as the different age structures of the study populations. e-3pg?M  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of v9lB k]c  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. IA#*T`  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity SoU'r]k1x  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. l~TIFmHkh%  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the |#:dC #  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. p]z54 ~  
80 McCarty et al. I@Z*Nu1L  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort p6Dv;@)Yn  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total k5QD5/Ej  
(years) (%) (%) (%) vLFaZ^(  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) 'a g6B(0Z  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( -s%-*K+,W  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) R|J>8AL}BY  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) *r,&@UB  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) ^ Xy$is3  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) 6+nMH +[  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) GHC?Tp   
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) f@Rpb}zg+C  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) LF)a"Sh  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) T ~~[a|bLa  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) ,C,e/>+My  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) d?&!y]RS#  
Age-standardized ?WQ d  
(95% CL) Combined 3.31 (2.70, 3.93) 4.36 (2.67, 6.06) 2.26 (0.82, 3.70) 3.79 (2.97, 4.60) r;on0wm&B  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract a}qse5Fr  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. YUVc9PV)Ws  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 lc3 S|4  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the O`[iz/7m  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude ,KhMzE8_a  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the tk)>CK11  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). /x:(SR2,  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains o~o6S=4,}  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban N?=qEX|R  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than h%1~v$W`  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, k99gjL`  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in ~AC P%QM=  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, gN, k/U8  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens "ji$@b_\?  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. Q k;Kn  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable qJ X+[PJ  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, BA1MGh  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that Wd^lt7(j  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and a81!~1A  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is zJfK4o  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted 'Vm5Cs$  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement 4/HY[FT  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We J}) $  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction 1!>bhH}{D  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have 5?3Isw`v2  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this V~J*49t&2J  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their Mt[Bq6}ZD  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants ;Na8 _}  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the [j:}=:feQ  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ ?jNF6z*M6  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their wGOMUWAt  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to 670J{b  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change y3={NB+  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function I"8d5a}  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in Y]+e  Df  
overall quality of life.22 ER~T'-YMS  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually DL'd&;6  
significant posterior capsule opacification following %PQl dPL8  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% pG,<_N@P  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated zQL!(2  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear &Q'\WA'  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an Wk/fB0   
opaque capsule. #joF{ M{  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and SW,q}-  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, W$z#ssr  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We " t5 +*  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more u{g]gA8s  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is (y=dR1p  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 51&|t#8h  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any }7iUagN  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of ijvNmn1k  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care +7Sf8tg\  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without  C}Rs[  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the d-hbvLn  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated p:Iw%eZ:  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. K1;z Mh  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem CI IY|DI`l  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract =ZG<BG_  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will .JNcY]V#  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the fG<Dhz@  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in $RpF xi  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well : @s8?eg  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes s5Pq$<  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. v,n);  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract yU*u  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for pV8[l)J  
cataract extractions increases. KCE=|*6::|  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 7@J jjV  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants -48`#"xy  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the c2/"KT  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell %y eu"  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and [U swf3  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient D2{L=  
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal V)=Z6ti  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. 18jJzYawh  
REFERENCES ;;M"hI3@  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. AHq M7+r9  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. TM)u?t+[  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, : g 5(HH  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population {y1q7Z.M  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. 3+ e4e  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens ,}KwP*:Z  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated B& "RS  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. a%v>eXc  
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related d bCNhbN(  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. ^}hJL7O'  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. \Y+")  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye wE?CvL  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population d @m\ f  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: /p,{?~0mj  
363–71. zz& vfO31J  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. {tc57jsr  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye "-P/jk  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. 9)Ly}Kzx  
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. ?,>5[Ha^?  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient oPsK:GC`U  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. )nOE 8y/  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. |kseKZ3  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated | g!`\@O  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. J0sGvj{  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. 6A?8t m/0  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too e}e6r3faz  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal }vY.EEy!  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: @D]l gq[  
77–80. W~yLl%  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice T pD;  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? 5{X*a  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. <h@]Ri  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest K"w%n[u)  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye ' %&z.{  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic 0m A(:"  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. g YUTt  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading =k_UjwgN^  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81.  n}OU Y  
82 McCarty et al. 6.19g'{sB  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & ? |VysJ  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. R5kH0{zM  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume 'Wp @b678  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International >f@ G>H)+  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. CmnHh~ %  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and E -SG8U;  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. UP8{5fx'  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison ~},W8\C>  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased I_>`hTiR  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment cz(G]{N  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. r6 }_H?j  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the &d,Wy"WPi  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health 4Jykos2  
Organization, 1997. b#='^W3  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, H,K`6HH  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation X=,6d9,  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. ;;Tq$#vd  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. CXAVGO'xw  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of !_x*m@/  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative !*vBW/  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. X"<|Z]w  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. Nfb`YU=  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated bVK$.*,  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. OZO b1D  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. 8 Z8Y[p  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract '[ 0YIn  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and u)~s4tP4  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. m~>@BCn;  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. 9)lZyE}   
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to PGX+p+wB  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. GOVAb'  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. z<<Tk.65  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A QO,+ps<  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule RL &lKHA  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. +)gB9DoK  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. HJ@5B"  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health P']Y( !L  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. %),!2_ x~  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in XeU<^ [  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, w~N-W8xNR  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract &yLc1#H  
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:
免费考博网网址是什么? 正确答案:freekaobo.com
按"Ctrl+Enter"直接提交