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 .K1E1Z_  
Purpose: To quantify the prevalence of cataract, the outcomes !#I/be]  
of cataract surgery and the factors related to 9sj W  
unoperated cataract in Australia. "EYj Y->  
Methods: Participants were recruited from the Visual B 9Q. s  
Impairment Project: a cluster, stratified sample of more than  Gy6 qLM  
5000 Victorians aged 40 years and over. At examination _`{{39 F  
sites interviews, clinical examinations and lens photography )v{41sM+  
were performed. Cataract was defined in participants who /_OZ1jX  
had: had previous cataract surgery, cortical cataract greater >MWpYp  
than 4/16, nuclear greater than Wilmer standard 2, or tW:/R@@  
posterior subcapsular greater than 1 mm2. :2)1vQH0L  
Results: The participant group comprised 3271 Melbourne HL}~W}!j  
residents, 403 Melbourne nursing home residents and 1473 [F)/mN  
rural residents.The weighted rate of any cataract in Victoria ,e FQ}&^A  
was 21.5%. The overall weighted rate of prior cataract XH:gQ9FD  
surgery was 3.79%. Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had ho]!G4 98  
had prior cataract surgery. Of these 249 procedures, 49 EKd3$(^   
(20%) were aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber px }7If  
intraocular lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber hY= s9\  
intraocular lenses.Two hundred and eleven of these operated uWB:"&!^  
eyes (85%) had best-corrected visual acuity of 6/12 or (d'j'U:C  
better, the legal requirement for a driver’s license.Twentyseven T$^>Fiz{Se  
(11%) had visual acuity of less than 6/18 (moderate B.mbKntK)R  
vision impairment). Complications of cataract surgery U 'CfP9=  
caused reduced vision in four of the 27 eyes (15%), or 1.9% Qyv'nx0=  
of operated eyes. Three of these four eyes had undergone .5!sOOs$P  
intracapsular cataract extraction and the fourth eye had an 45)ogg2  
opaque posterior capsule. No one had bilateral vision <duBwkiG  
impairment as a result of cataract surgery. Surprisingly, no mfngbFa1  
particular demographic factors (such as age, gender, rural XiRT|%j  
residence, occupation, employment status, health insurance U+* oI*  
status, ethnicity) were related to the presence of unoperated 6A$_&?  
cataract. RO%tuU,-  
Conclusions: Although the overall prevalence of cataract is Wj4^W<IO  
quite high, no particular subgroup is systematically underserviced Oj"pj:fB  
in terms of cataract surgery. Overall, the results of 3 |K=%jr[  
cataract surgery are very good, with the majority of eyes G9i&#)nWr  
achieving driving vision following cataract extraction. 5 dfe@$  
Key words: cataract extraction, health planning, health K_At U/  
services accessibility, prevalence E/~"j  
INTRODUCTION M<A;IOpR+  
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide and, in lrs0^@.+  
Australia, cataract extractions account for the majority of all rL%]S&M9  
ophthalmic procedures.1 Over the period 1985–94, the rate HPt Tv}l  
of cataract surgery in Australia was twice as high as would be s; B j 7]  
expected from the growth in the elderly population.1 !fi &@k  
Although there have been a number of studies reporting NK7H,V}T  
the prevalence of cataract in various populations,2–6 there is | V.S.'  
little information about determinants of cataract surgery in &/ >;LgN  
the population. A previous survey of Australian ophthalmologists Q7~'![(a  
showed that patient concern and lifestyle, rather dGbU{#"3s  
than visual acuity itself, are the primary factors for referral ~\IF9!  
for cataract surgery.7 This supports prior research which has ^))PCn_zb  
shown that visual acuity is not a strong predictor of need for MzEm*`<  
cataract surgery.8,9 Elsewhere, socioeconomic status has zwM"`z  
been shown to be related to cataract surgery rates.10 IL~]m?'V(  
To appropriately plan health care services, information is <i\UMrD]`:  
needed about the prevalence of age-related cataract in the pU?{0xZH  
community as well as the factors associated with cataract CfPXn0I  
surgery. The purpose of this study is to quantify the prevalence dT5J-70Fl  
of any cataract in Australia, to describe the factors L;/9L[s,  
related to unoperated cataract in the community and to :3f-9aRC!  
describe the visual outcomes of cataract surgery. U91 &|  
METHODS y;Qy"-)qb  
Study population @%6)^]m} r  
Details about the study methodology for the Visual UZzNVIXA%  
Impairment Project have been published previously.11 J.1O/Pw!.a  
Briefly, cluster sampling within three strata was employed to uQH%.A  
recruit subjects aged 40 years and over to participate. M{ C6rm|  
Within the Melbourne Statistical Division, nine pairs of p86~~rvq[  
census collector districts were randomly selected. Fourteen # v{Y=$L  
nursing homes within a 5 km radius of these nine test sites iV5}U2Vh  
were randomly chosen to recruit nursing home residents. cNe0x2Z$?  
Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2000) 28, 77–82 hS4.3]ei  
Original Article EJ1Bq>u7  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia /+>)"D6'  
Catherine A McCarty PhD, MPH, Mukesh B Nanjan PhD, Hugh R Taylor MD =v.{JV#  
Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia DhZ:#mM{  
n Correspondence: Dr Cathy McCarty MPH, Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, YPu9Q  
Victoria 3002, Australia. Email: cathy@cera.unimelb.edu.au lK0s=4c{  
78 McCarty et al. WrNLGkt  
Finally, four pairs of census collector districts in four rural *'6s63)I2  
Victorian communities were randomly selected to recruit rural ! 0^;;'  
residents. A household census was conducted to identify KE<kj$  
eligible residents aged 40 years and over who had been a T'E ] i!$  
resident at that address for at least 6 months. At the time of UEzsDJu  
the household census, basic information about age, sex, X2qv^G,  
country of birth, language spoken at home, education, use of ~8TF*3[}[  
corrective spectacles and use of eye care services was collected. ^ oYPyk`9  
Eligible residents were then invited to attend a local wzd`l?o,  
examination site for a more detailed interview and examination. _g[-=y{Bb  
The study protocol was approved by the Royal Victorian +IrZ ;&oy  
Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. #b'N}2'p#V  
Assessment of cataract 9e!vA6Fx  
A standardized ophthalmic examination was performed after n@hl2M6.x9  
pupil dilatation with one drop of 10% phenylephrine [& ^RP,N~  
hydrochloride. Lens opacities were graded clinically at the Oa! m  
time of the examination and subsequently from photos using # Q}_e7t  
the Wilmer cataract photo-grading system.12 Cortical and &R,9+c  
posterior subcapsular (PSC) opacities were assessed on \6o\+OQk  
retroillumination and measured as the proportion (in 1/16) f8=]oa]  
of pupil circumference occupied by opacity. For this analysis, )s)_XL  
cortical cataract was defined as 4/16 or greater opacity, ,X68xk.'  
PSC cataract was defined as opacity equal to or greater than w~|1Wd<v  
1 mm2 and nuclear cataract was defined as opacity equal to "k:=Y7Dx  
or greater than Wilmer standard 2,12 independent of visual G(/D tY]  
acuity. Examples of the minimum opacities defined as cortical, yS!(Ap  
nuclear and PSC cataract are presented in Figure 1. oZN'H T  
Bilateral congenital cataracts or cataracts secondary to 'N\&<dT>  
intraocular inflammation or trauma were excluded from the o_f-GO  
analysis. Two cases of bilateral secondary cataract and eight [ ny6W9  
cases of bilateral congenital cataract were excluded from the  @pFj9[N  
analyses. :U'Cor H  
A Topcon® SL5 photo slit-lamp (Topcon America Corp., | kXm}K  
Paramus, NJ, USA) with a 0.1 mm slit beam of 9.0 mm in Y/fJQ6DY  
height set to an incident angle of 30° was used for examinations. 20tO#{Li  
Ektachrome® 200 ASA colour slide film (Eastman wvN`R  
Kodak Company, Rochester, NY, USA) was used to photograph I4=Xb^Ux  
the nuclear opacities. The cortical opacities were [=uIb._Wv  
photographed with an Oxford® retroillumination camera ;a r><w  
(Marcher Enterprises Ltd, Hereford, UK) and T-MAX® 400 o&SSv W  
film (Eastman Kodak). Photographs were graded separately jVWK0Zba  
by two research assistants and discrepancies were adjudicated },@``&e  
by an independent reviewer. Any discrepancies e,gyQjJR  
between the clinical grades and the photograph grades were I :l01W;  
resolved. Except in cases where photographs were missing, [ MyE2^  
the photograph grades were used in the analyses. Photograph Z>P*@S,6G  
grades were available for 4301 (84%) for cortical xZ.!d.rn  
cataract, 4147 (81%) for nuclear cataract and 4303 (84%) 56}X/u  
for PSC cataract. Cataract status was classified according to }m- "8\_D  
the severity of the opacity in the worse eye. ZZxk]D<  
Assessment of risk factors I&VTW8jB  
A standardized questionnaire was used to obtain information l \OLyQ  
about education, employment and ethnic background.11 !t#F/C  
Specific information was elicited on the occurrence, duration G`0V)S  
and treatment of a number of medical conditions, Cu;5RSr2Z  
including ocular trauma, arthritis, diabetes, gout, hypertension 3Q^fVn$tk  
and mental illness. Information about the use, dose and N2C7[z+l`  
duration of tobacco, alcohol, analgesics and steriods were UL$}{2N,_  
collected, and a food frequency questionnaire was used to ` G9 l  
determine current consumption of dietary sources of antioxidants 4rg2y]  
and use of vitamin supplements. 88s/Q0l  
Data management and statistical analysis c9"r6j2m5  
Data were collected either by direct computer entry with a b97w^ah4gJ  
questionnaire programmed in Paradox© (Carel Corporation, 8^/I>0EZ  
Ottawa, Canada) with internal consistency checks, or #%0Bx3uM  
on self-coding forms. Open-ended responses were coded at .B2]xfo"`  
a later time. Data that were entered on the self-coded forms 4GdX/6C.  
were entered into a computer with double data entry and Yr.sm!xA  
reconciliation of any inconsistencies. Data range and consistency >Gml4vGK  
checks were performed on the entire data set. ~^jq(:d)  
SAS© version 6.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was 8,P- 7^  
employed for statistical analyses. -a,-J]d0+  
Ninety-five per cent confidence limits around the agespecific q[q?hQ /b  
rates were calculated according to Cochran13 to aT!'}GjL  
account for the effect of the cluster sampling. Ninety-five YHkcWz  
per cent confidence limits around age-standardized rates W!Hm~9fz  
were calculated according to Breslow and Day.14 The strataspecific 3<?   
data were weighted according to the 1996 fWfk[(M'9  
Australian Bureau of Statistics census data15 to reflect the !G^L/?z3  
cataract prevalence in the entire Victorian population. . o7m!  
Univariate analyses with Student’s t-tests and chi-squared J%09^5:-z  
tests were first employed to evaluate risk factors for unoperated xsd_Uu *  
cataract. Any factors with P < 0.10 were then fitted 00v&lQBW  
into a backwards stepwise logistic regression model. For the |8> 3`w!  
Figure 1. Minimum levels of cortical (a), nuclear (b), and posterior subcapsular (c) cataract. "Ve.cP,7(  
final multivariate models, P < 0.05 was considered statistically 0"2=n.##  
significant. Design effect was assessed through the use drzL.@h|  
of cluster-specific models and multivariate models. The Q_* "SRz  
design effect was assumed to be additive and an adjustment p&+;w  
made in the variance by adding the variance associated with (" LQll9  
the design effect prior to constructing the 95% confidence eP*lI<NQ1  
limits. Ee4&g <X.  
RESULTS |f~@8|MQP+  
Study population *Qugv^-  
A total of 3271 (83%) of the Melbourne residents, 403 }ci# >  
(90%) Melbourne nursing home residents, and 1473 (92%) y_\p=0t8  
rural residents participated. In general, non-participants did 'YNT8w/3  
not differ from participants.16 The study population was ;"(foY"L  
representative of the Victorian population and Australia as 'cY` w  
a whole. :ba5iMa  
The Melbourne residents ranged in age from 40 to Cmc3k,t  
98 years (mean = 59) and 1511 (46%) were male. The 0a-:<zm  
Melbourne nursing home residents ranged in age from 46 to T&Lb<'f  
101 years (mean = 82) and 85 (21%) were men. The rural CPNL 94x  
residents ranged in age from 40 to 103 years (mean = 60) h/~n\0,J/  
and 701 (47.5%) were men. <n]x#0p  
Prevalence of cataract and prior cataract surgery @V03a )6,h  
As would be expected, the rate of any cataract increases . 'Y]R3\M+  
dramatically with age (Table 1). The weighted rate of any MEwo} =B  
cataract in Victoria was 21.5% (95% CL 18.1, 24.9). 0GJn_@hr  
Although the rates varied somewhat between the three >JiltF7H0  
strata, they were not significantly different as the 95% confidence ]Dw]p! @  
limits overlapped. The per cent of cataractous eyes 7Hm3;P.  
with best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/12 was 12.5% ) /z@vY  
(65/520) for cortical cataract, 18% for nuclear cataract lo[.&GD  
(97/534) and 14.4% (27/187) for PSC cataract. Cataract r$2P;Cxj  
surgery also rose dramatically with age. The overall _q~=~nub  
weighted rate of prior cataract surgery in Victoria was ,?L2wl[  
3.79% (95% CL 2.97, 4.60) (Table 2). qh`t-  
Risk factors for unoperated cataract D9z|VIw8  
Cases of cataract that had not been removed were classified qAw x2fPu  
as unoperated cataract. Risk factor analyses for unoperated )I3NeKWz  
cataract were not performed with the nursing home residents 9/nn)soC3  
as information about risk factor exposure was not XGl+S  
available for this cohort. The following factors were assessed y\ a1iy  
in relation to unoperated cataract: age, sex, residence ^k]XEW{PG  
(urban/rural), language spoken at home (a measure of ethnic 9=U kV\m)  
integration), country of birth, parents’ country of birth (a t^w"w`v\u  
measure of ethnicity), years since migration, education, use rb|U;)C  
of ophthalmic services, use of optometric services, private ;Rv!k&Df  
health insurance status, duration of distance glasses use, E2m8UBS  
glaucoma, age-related maculopathy and employment status. VY3&  
In this cross sectional study it was not possible to assess the ;cQ6g` bM\  
level of visual acuity that would predict a patient’s having DCZ\6WY1G)  
cataract surgery, as visual acuity data prior to cataract zzyHoZJP  
surgery were not available. NgY =&W,  
The significant risk factors for unoperated cataract in univariate \Cii1\R=  
analyses were related to: whether a participant had R00eisd  
ever seen an optometrist, seen an ophthalmologist or been 5=Di<!a;  
diagnosed with glaucoma; and participants’ employment $g sxO!G  
status (currently employed) and age. These significant mFi&YpH u3  
factors were placed in a backwards stepwise logistic regression |>#{[wko  
model. The factors that remained significantly related kOed ]>H  
to unoperated cataract were whether participants had ever A -b [>} _  
seen an ophthalmologist, seen an optometrist and been `5C,N!d8X  
diagnosed with glaucoma. None of the demographic factors svq<)hAf<  
were associated with unoperated cataract in the multivariate ](s'L8 (x  
model. pim!.=vN/U  
The per cent of participants with unoperated cataract lMBLIB]i  
who said that they were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with `tn{ei  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 79 (,8$V\  
Table 1. Prevalence of any cataracta (excluding previous cataract surgery) by age, gender and cohort v+X)Qmzf~  
Age group Sex Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total tfGHea)M  
(years) (%) (%) (%) Zd')57{  
40–49 Male 2.56 4.04 0.00 3.00 (1.91, 4.08) -&-Ma,M?  
Female 2.61 1.70 0.00 2.36 (1.61, 3.10) c\Q7"!e  
50–59 Male 7.69 6.94 0.00 7.47 (5.80, 9.15) pNKhc# -w  
Female 6.67 7.56 0.00 6.92 (5.60, 8.24) ,d{"m)r<  
60–69 Male 20.7 25.0 10.0 22.0 (18.1, 26.0) dfij|>:*0  
Female 27.9 35.7 37.5 30.3 (26.0, 34.7) "t~  
70–79 Male 43.1 58.7 39.1 48.1 (41.2, 55.1) tV{ 4"Ij9[  
Female 58.6 66.2 55.6 61.0 (56.0, 65.9) CW,Wx:Y  
80–89 Male 74.0 89.3 92.0 79.3 (72.3, 86.3) '7i Sp=  
Female 91.9 97.0 80.2 92.6 (86.4, 98.8) 6x%h6<#xh*  
90 + Male 100.0 100.0 75.0 98.8 (96.2, 100.0) n6BQk 2l  
Female 100.0 100.0 93.8 98.6 (97.0, 100.0) B Ere*J  
Age-standardized -De9_0#R  
(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) _N{RVeO  
aCortical > 4/16, nuclear > standard 2, posterior subcapsular > 1 mm2 $3s@}vLd  
their current vision was 30% (290/683), compared with 27% ~wkj&yVT  
(26/95) of participants with prior cataract surgery (chisquared, 4X+ifZO  
1 d.f. = 0.25, P = 0.62). iq e%=%ZR  
Outcomes of cataract surgery 1$p2}Bf {n  
Two hundred and forty-nine eyes had undergone prior F!]lU`z)=  
cataract surgery. Of these 249 operated eyes, 49 (20%) were 4UW_Do  
left aphakic, 6 (2.4%) had anterior chamber intraocular %)0*&a 4  
lenses and 194 (78%) had posterior chamber intraocular `s8{C b=}1  
lenses. The rate of capsulotomy in the eyes with intact F7O(Cy"1  
posterior capsules was 36% (73/202). Fifteen per cent of &i$ldR  
eyes (17/114) with a clear posterior capsule had bestcorrected /Z@tv .f  
visual acuity of less than 6/12 compared with 43% tX> G,hw  
of eyes (6/14) with opaque capsules, and 15% of eyes vJ-q*qM1  
(11/73) with prior capsulotomies (chi-squared, 2 d.f. = 7.21, b"#WxgaF  
P = 0.027). A*}.EClH  
The percentage of eyes with best-corrected visual acuity P dhEQ}H  
of 6/12 or better was 96% (302/314) for eyes without *rIk:FehLB  
cataract, 88% (1417/1609) for eyes with prevalent cataract (K)]qNH  
and 85% (211/249) for eyes with operated cataract (chisquared, OslL~<  
2 d.f. = 22.3), P < 0.001). Twenty-seven of the ?MgUY)X  
operated eyes (11%) had visual acuities of less than 6/18 >76\nGO  
(moderate vision impairment) (Fig. 2). A cause of this g!+| I  
moderate visual impairment (but not the only cause) in four #py[  
(15%) eyes was secondary to cataract surgery. Three of these ^`)) C;  
four eyes had undergone intracapsular cataract extraction uFPF!Ern  
and the fourth eye had an opaque posterior capsule. No one T ^~5n6  
had bilateral vision impairment as a result of their cataract ~ ==>pj  
surgery. OVhE??#  
DISCUSSION r?Wk<>%>  
To our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically bdF.qO9  
assess the prevalence of current cataract, previous cataract ak |WW]R  
surgery, predictors of unoperated cataract and the outcomes b/{t|io{  
of cataract surgery in a population-based sample. The Visual #7 q7PYG4  
Impairment Project is unique in that the sampling frame and H=Y{rq@  
high response rate have ensured that the study population is ]2\VweV  
representative of Australians aged 40 years and over. Therefore, Db1pW=66:  
these data can be used to plan age-related cataract L&%s[  
services throughout Australia.  \V*xWS  
We found the rate of any cataract in those over the age h >s!K9  
of 40 years to be 22%. Although relatively high, this rate is !`M|C?b  
significantly less than was reported in a number of previous ( 8c9 /7h  
studies,2,4,6 with the exception of the Casteldaccia Eye twlk-2yT!  
Study.5 However, it is difficult to compare rates of cataract m|:_]/*qE  
between studies because of different methodologies and TG+VEL |T  
cataract definitions employed in the various studies, as well )>`G  
as the different age structures of the study populations. KNLfp1!  
Other studies have used less conservative definitions of Wu_kx2h  
cataract, thus leading to higher rates of cataract as defined. LG1r]2  
In most large epidemiologic studies of cataract, visual acuity -QmO1U  
has not been included in the definition of cataract. W>p-u6u%E|  
Therefore, the prevalence of cataract may not reflect the 2g>SHS@1>  
actual need for cataract surgery in the community. q~vDz]\G  
80 McCarty et al. rjPL+T_  
Table 2. Prevalence of previous cataract by age, gender and cohort 66I"=:  
Age group Gender Urban Rural Nursing home Weighted total (3 #Cl 1]f  
(years) (%) (%) (%) :E@3Vl#U  
40–49 Male 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.80 (0.00, 1.81) uec!RKE  
Female 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ( 7e#?e+5+A  
50–59 Male 0.68 0.58 0.00 0.65 (0.13, 1.17) nCj2N,mT  
Female 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.41 (0.00, 1.00) p-zXp K"  
60–69 Male 2.12 7.59 0.00 3.80 (1.41, 6.19) |<.lW  
Female 2.11 3.51 0.00 2.54 (1.81, 3.26) d~:!#uWyFk  
70–79 Male 8.22 9.85 8.70 8.75 (6.38, 11.1) -:Ia^{YN  
Female 7.21 7.86 7.02 7.41 (5.36, 9.46) L.1_(3NG  
80–89 Male 25.0 30.0 14.3 26.2 (17.0, 35.4) P3nb2.  
Female 27.9 25.6 18.3 26.7 (20.2, 33.3) 6u`)QUmItg  
90 + Male 0.00 16.7 66.7 9.19 (0.00, 21.5) mqAWL:VvQ7  
Female 58.3 100.0 26.9 63.1 (44.4, 81.8) n1&% e6XhO  
Age-standardized SOi*SwQ8  
(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) 8rMX9qTO@  
Figure 2. Visual acuity in eyes that had undergone cataract OZTPOz.  
surgery, n = 249. h, Presenting; j, best-corrected. /~Z?27F6@  
Operated and unoperated cataract in Australia 81 gUpb 4uN  
The weighted prevalence of prior cataract surgery in the bBS,-vN  
Visual Impairment Project (3.6%) was similar to the crude J]G? Rc  
rate in the Beaver Dam Eye Study4 (3.1%), but less than the _:-ha?W$;y  
crude rate in the Blue Mountains Eye Study6 (6.0%). A Q+]|XYo_  
However, the age-standardized rate in the Blue Mountains Lv'D^'I  
Eye Study (standardized to the age distribution of the urban #L{OV)a<  
Visual Impairment Project cohort) was found to be less than T:IW%?M  
the Visual Impairment Project (standardized rate = 1.36%, ae*Mf7  
95% CL 1.25, 1.47). The incidence of cataract surgery in _%B^9Yl3(  
Australia has exceeded population growth.1 This is due, qZh1`\G  
perhaps, to advances in surgical techniques and lens mN>h5G>a  
implants that have changed the risk–benefit ratio. 5fm?Lxr&?  
The Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable :bWUuXVtJ  
Blindness, sponsored by the World Health Organization, 8&Oa_{1+Q  
states that cataract surgical services should be provided that .GsO.#p{  
‘have a high success rate in terms of visual outcome and zD(`B+  
improved quality of life’,17 although the ‘high success rate’ is a_ `[Lj  
not defined. Population- and clinic-based studies conducted o4%y>d)  
in the United States have demonstrated marked improvement r ; xLP  
in visual acuity following cataract surgery.18–20 We \uXcLhXN  
found that 85% of eyes that had undergone cataract extraction +\|Iu;w  
had visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Previously, we have QR Ei7@t  
shown that participants with prevalent cataract in this *_KFW@bC:  
cohort are more likely to express dissatisfaction with their W3;#fa:[L  
current vision than participants without cataract or participants 6X\ 2GC9  
with prior cataract surgery.21 In a national study in the FI<q@HF  
United States, researchers found that the change in patients’ *0|IXGr  
ratings of their vision difficulties and satisfaction with their Q^q1 ns;r  
vision after cataract surgery were more highly related to Ma\Gb+>  
their change in visual functioning score than to their change 0%Z]h?EYy|  
in visual acuity.19 Furthermore, improvement in visual function V`RNM%Y  
has been shown to be associated with improvement in L9@&2?k  
overall quality of life.22 Vm df8[5  
A recent review found that the incidence of visually `d[1`P1i[  
significant posterior capsule opacification following Y= ]dvc  
cataract surgery to be greater than 25%.23 We found 36% XO9M_*Va  
capsulotomy in our population and that this was associated n f.wCtf].  
with visual acuity similar to that of eyes with a clear ;i"*Ll>Q)  
capsule, but significantly better than that of eyes with an Ezi-VGjr]  
opaque capsule. Hw|AA?,0-  
A number of studies have shown that the demand and 6}(J6T46M[  
timing of cataract surgery vary according to visual acuity, @0eHS +  
degree of handicap and socioeconomic factors.8–10,24,25 We _9?I A  
have also shown previously that ophthalmologists are more k $f Gom  
likely to refer a patient for cataract surgery if the patient is W?We6.%  
employed and less likely to refer a nursing home resident.7 eXkujjSw"  
In the Visual Impairment Project, we did not find that any Z1h ]  
particular subgroup of the population was at greater risk of d @*GUmJ  
having unoperated cataract. Universal access to health care wBInq~K_  
in Australia may explain the fact that people without /c$\X<b);  
Medicare are more likely to delay cataract operations in the `-\/$M9s=  
USA,8 but not having private health insurance is not associated o d7]tOK9  
with unoperated cataract in Australia. 8 :o<ry  
In summary, cataract is a significant public health problem k`{@pt.  
in that one in four people in their 80s will have had cataract 37q@rD m2  
surgery. The importance of age-related cataract surgery will 6SC,;p=  
increase further with the ageing of the population: the e } *0ghKI  
number of people over age 60 years is expected to double in Y]; Ycj;  
the next 20 years. Cataract surgery services are well /{{UP-  
accessed by the Victorian population and the visual outcomes 8LI-gp\ 2  
of cataract surgery have been shown to be very good. `T2$4>!  
These data can be used to plan for age-related cataract  8*c3|  
surgical services in Australia in the future as the need for bpkwn<7-  
cataract extractions increases. NJ MJ  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS S|zW^|YU  
The Visual Impairment Project was funded in part by grants &(a(W22O  
from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the IhiGP {  
National Health and Medical Research Council, the Ansell GI7=x h  
Ophthalmology Foundation, the Dorothy Edols Estate and y#<MV H  
the Jack Brockhoff Foundation. Dr McCarty is the recipient kL90&nP   
of a Wagstaff Fellowship in Ophthalmology from the Royal A;J MV+2N  
Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. vZ#!uU^a:  
REFERENCES 3p*-tBOO  
1. Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. Cataract surgery in Australia 1985–94. 7 yt=]1  
Aust. N.Z. J. Ophthalmol. 1996; 24: 313–17. M0c 9pE  
2. Sperduto RD, Hiller R. The prevalence of nuclear, cortical, {S<>&?XB  
and posterior subcapsular lens opacities in a general population w# * 1/N  
sample. Ophthalmology 1984; 91: 815–18. R 4wr  
3. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Sperduto RD et al. Distribution of lens *fO{ a  
opacities in the Italian-American case–control study of agerelated l+y}4 k=/  
cataract. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 752–6. m~],nl   
4. Klein BEK, Klein R, Linton KLP. Prevalence of age-related 1j\aH&)GH  
lens opacities in a population. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. p8+/\Ee]B  
Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 546–52. {6d b{ ay_  
5. Guiffrè G, Giammanco R, Di Pace F, Ponte F. Casteldaccia eye \;]kYO}  
study: prevalence of cataract in the adult and elderly population m= b~i^@  
of a Mediterranean town. Int. Ophthalmol. 1995; 18: 5M23/= N  
363–71. q9dLHi<1  
6. Mitchell P, Cumming RG, Attebo K, Panchapakesan J. WjM>kWv  
Prevalence of cataract in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye XNH4==4  
Study. Ophthalmology 1997; 104: 581–8. mEQ!-p   
7. Keeffe JE, McCarty CA, Chang WP, Steinberg EP, Taylor HR. \,sg)^w@  
Relative importance of VA, patient concern and patient ,fnsE^}.U  
lifestyle on referral for cataract surgery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. 5]7&IDA]]9  
Sci. 1996; 37: S183. {@r*+~C3  
8. Curbow B, Legro MW, Brenner MH. The influence of patientrelated `<j_[(5yb  
variables in the timing of cataract extraction. Am. J. i~&c|  
Ophthalmol. 1993; 115: 614–22. bj"z8kP  
9. Sletteberg OH, Høvding G, Bertelsen T. Do we operate too jxy1  
many cataracts? The referred cataract patients’ own appraisal /qxJgoa  
of their need for surgery. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 1995; 73: =J@`0H"  
77–80. Yb=6C3l@  
10. Escarce JJ. Would eliminating differences in physician practice #@Ujx_F  
style reduce geographic variations in cataract surgery rates? p\U*;'hv  
Med. Care 1993; 31: 1106–18. D{AFL.r{  
11. Livingston PM, Carson CA, Stanislavsky YL, Lee SE, Guest {rPk3  
CS, Taylor HR. Methods for a population-based study of eye 2q %K)h  
disease: the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Ophthalmic JCQ:+eqt  
Epidemiol. 1994; 1: 139–48. _ K/swT{f  
12. Taylor HR, West SK. A simple system for the clinical grading 8Z:Ezg3^  
of lens opacities. Lens Res. 1988; 5: 175–81. M\yHUS6N  
82 McCarty et al. 8Inx/>eOI  
13. Cochran WG. Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & S!7g)  
Sons, 1977; 249–73. >%c* Xe  
14. Breslow NE, Day NE. Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume 9Q@*0-  
II – the Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies. Lyon: International [A_r1g&_  
Agency for Research on Cancer; 1987; 52–61. 5.k}{{+  
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1996 Census of Population and  E&%jeR  
Housing. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997. e}Q>\t45  
16. Livingston PM, Lee SE, McCarty CA, Taylor HR. A comparison >Zdi5') 5  
of participants with non-participants in a populationbased baIbf@t/  
epidemiologic study: the Melbourne Visual Impairment >h[(w  
Project. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1997; 4: 73–82. _j 5N=I{U  
17. Programme for the Prevention of Blindness. Global Initiative for the n4>cERf a  
Elimination of Avoidable Blindness. Geneva: World Health E 0`[G]*G  
Organization, 1997. ,xj3w#`zaf  
18. Applegate WB, Miller ST, Elam JT, Freeman JM, Wood TO, M]B3vPA/v  
Gettlefinger TC. Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation ~@YQ,\Y  
on vision and physical function in elderly patients. b8HE."*t  
JAMA 1987; 257: 1064–6. RH=$h! 5  
19. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD et al. National Study of Bj&_IDs4  
Cataract Surgery Outcomes. Variation in 4-month postoperative ~BQV]BJ7  
outcomes as reflected in multiple outcome measures. F(E<,l2[  
Ophthalmology 1994; 101:1131–41. bpnv&EG  
20. Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Change in visual acuity associated QmHwn)Ly  
with cataract surgery. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. ,$BgR2^  
Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1727–31. qM*S*,s  
21. McCarty CA, Keeffe JE, Taylor HR. The need for cataract 0T1ko,C!,e  
surgery: projections based on lens opacity, visual acuity, and v\'r Xy  
personal concern. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1999; 83: 62–5. lY->ucS %P  
22. Brenner MH, Curbow B, Javitt JC, Legro MW, Sommer A. enPLaiJ'|q  
Vision change and quality of life in the elderly. Response to jjX%$Hr  
cataract surgery and treatment of other ocular conditions. e^Aa!  
Arch. Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 680–5. +Tp%5+E  
23. Schaumberg DA, Dana MR, Christen WG, Glynn RJ. A i[8NO$tN1)  
systematic overview of the incidence of posterior capsule %awVVt{aG  
opacification. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1213–21. ret0z|  
24. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. r/^tzH's  
Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. J. Public Health >j) w\i  
Med. 1994; 16: 393–8. joY1(Y  
25. Norregaard JC, Bernth-Peterson P, Alonso J et al. Variations in PlF!cr7:4  
indications for cataract surgery in the United States, Denmark, &q"'_4  
Canada, and Spain: results from the International Cataract /<6ywLD  
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