Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology
V]4g-
CS[ 2006;
S}mZU! 34
cOhx : 880–885
#RfNk;kaA doi:10.1111/j.1442-9071.2006.01342.x
W>^WNo3YQ$ © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
">-J+ST% }MW7,F Correspondence:
$9~6M* Dr Garry Brian, 5 Hazelmere Parade, Sherwood, Qld 4075, Australia. Email:
grbrian@tpg.com.au kK62yz, Received 11 April 2006; accepted 19 June 2006.
whoM$ & Original Article
gfr
y5e Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea
[.ya&E)
x Jambi N Garap
Ll2yJ
.C4 MMed(Ophthal)
-XuRQ_)nG ,
&>jSuvVT 1,2
-a^%9 U Sethu Sheeladevi
O6
:GE'S MHM
[wLK*9@& ,
cPx]:sC 3
q3_ceXYU Garry Brian
sWG_MEbu FRANZCO
_"4u?C# ,
sYMgi D 2,4
g`n5-D@3 BR Shamanna
w$`[C+L MD
<SPT2NyX ,
h?D>Dfeg% 3
^8z~`he=_J Praveen K Nirmalan
BQOit. MPH
[yyL2=7 3
Dr_ (u<[ and Carmel Williams
[$x&J6jF. MA
y\C_HCU H 4
79yF { 1
Cih~cwE The Fred Hollows Foundation – Papua New Guinea Eye Care Program,
+[lv
`tr
2
U3 -cH Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine and Health
R?Dc*, Sciences, University of Papua New Guinea, Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea;
V Kw33 3
kGkfLY6B International Center for Advancement of Rural Eye Care,
8TE2q Pm L.V. Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India; and
q+J;^u"E 4
.@kjC4m The Fred Hollows Foundation (New Zealand), Auckland, New Zealand
/=
i+7^ Key words:
2 {I(A2 blindness
UVUoXv)N ,
jqJ't)N cataract
;
`Vbl_"L ,
G@=H='
:~ Papua New Guinea
N,0&xg3 ,
|ZmWhkOX surgery
B*AF8wX| ,
P: QSr8K vision impairment
c*N>7IF, .
IPDQ I
lmbC2\GT NTRODUCTION
Q^@z]Sc[ Just north of Australia, tropical Papua New Guinea (PNG)
i9=*ls^Cx has more than five million people spread across several major
D"vl$BX and hundreds of other smaller islands. Almost 50% of the
nN*:"F/^ land area is mountainous, and 85% of inhabitants are rural
6)#=@i`
\ dwellers. Forty per cent of the population is age 14 years or
#bZT&YE^ younger, and 9% is 50 years or older.
[39 1
%1UdG6&J_ Papua New Guinea was administered by Australia until
'.5_L8 1975, when independence was granted. Since that time, governance,
#
M18&ld,r particularly budgetary, economic performance, law
FI=]K8 and justice, and development and management of basic
o"Mhwh health and other services have declined. Today, 37% of the
oRZ--1oR_ population is said to live below the poverty line, personal
upefjwm and property security are problematic, and health is poor.
s+7#Tdh A There are significant and growing economic, health and education
rL3 f%L disparities between urban and rural inhabitants.
i8+[-mh Papua New Guinea has one referral hospital, in Port
P; DGs]PF Moresby. This has an eye clinic with one part-time and two
eUZvJTE full-time consultant ophthalmologists, and several ophthalmology
{<#~Ya- training registrars. There are also two private ophthalmologists
;'7gg] in the city. Elsewhere, four provincial hospitals
r{
}&* Y have eye clinics, each with one consultant ophthalmologist.
jFPD SR5 One of these, supported by Christian Blind Mission and
rhQ
v,F9 based at Goroka, provides an extensive outreach service.
IWs)n1D*] Visiting Australian and New Zealand ophthalmology teams
Ce-D^9kC and an outreach team from Port Moresby General Hospital
x17K8De provide some 6 weeks of provincial service per year.
K'u66%wAL Cataract and its surgery account for a significant proportion
s:f%=4-7 of ophthalmic resource allocation and services delivered
@yxF/eeEy+ in PNG. Although the National Department of Health keeps
(n
{,R some service-related statistics, and cataract has been considered
:W*']8 M- in three PNG publications of limited value (two district
}Gi4`Es service reports
S*9qpes-m| 2,3
na-mh
E,H and a community assessment
p8_
C
Y[U 4
4!)=!sL; ), there has
]aqg{XdGt been no systematic assessment of cataract or its surgery.
/M@6r<2`i A
jc-$l BSTRACT
vzPuk|q3 Purpose:
/\e&nYz To determine the prevalence of visually significant
#s]'2O cataract, unoperated blinding cataract, and cataract surgery
[)L) R` for those aged 50 years and over in Papua New Guinea.
%9Y3jB",2 Also, to determine the characteristics, rate, coverage and
*p=a-s5- outcome of cataract surgery, and barriers to its uptake.
u{d\3-]/ Methods:
jGaI6
G'N Using the World Health Organization Rapid
Uk@'[_1z Assessment of Cataract Surgical Services protocol, a population-
KE*8Y4#9 based cross-sectional survey was conducted in
HLsG<# 2005. By two-stage cluster random sampling, 39 clusters of
e3!0<A[X 30 people were selected. Each eye with a presenting visual
Lj#K^c Ee acuity worse than 6/18 and/or a history of cataract surgery
Z(0sMOaX was examined.
X^c2 Results:
^j>w<ljzz Of the 1191 people enumerated, 98.6% were
oasEG6OI8 examined. The 50 years and older age-gender-adjusted
w_hN2eYo&e prevalence of cataract-induced vision impairment (presenting
Iw
J4K+ acuity less than 6/18 in the better eye) was 7.4% (95%
e_Un:r@) confidence interval [CI]: 6.4, 10.2, design effect [deff]
N
`1W"Rx! =
`Eq~W@';Q0 1.3).
~&\} qz3 That for cataract-caused functional blindness (presenting
&w"1VOV< acuity less than 6/60 in the better eye) was 6.4% (95% CI:
~P;KO40K 5.1, 7.3, deff
rwh,RI)
)g =
r>Rm=eKJ 1.1). The latter was not associated with
Rt=zqfJ gender (
B;=-h(E}vJ P
4/:}K>S_ =
e$=UA% 0.6). For the sample, Cataract Surgical Coverage
Z?"f# at 6/60 was 34.5% for Eyes and 45.3% for Persons. The
|'ML
)`c[ Cataract Surgical Rate for Papua New Guinea was less than
~8l(,N0 500 per million population per year. The age-genderadjusted
%ok??_}$}q prevalence of those having had cataract surgery
eF=cMC was 8.3% (95% CI: 6.6, 9.8, deff
:Y)jf =
MIF`|3$, 1.3). Vision outcomes of
K}e:zR;;^ surgery did not meet World Health Organization guidelines.
|0N6]%r Lack of awareness was the most common reason for not
[QZ g=." seeking and undergoing surgery.
vnr{Ekg Conclusion:
1r?hRJ:' Increasing the quantity and quality of cataract
=&~7Q" surgery need to be priorities for Papua New Guinea eye
OAw- -rl care services.
G~
mLc Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 881
`WRM7 © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
Z`]r)z%f This paper reports the cataract-related aspects of a population-
}p|S3/G?$! based cross-sectional rapid assessment survey of
9Rd&Jq^ those 50 years and older in PNG.
scQnL'
\ M
kWMz;{I5*w ETHODS
[L ?^
+p> The National Ethical Clearance Committee of The Medical
uEui{_2$ Research Advisory Committee granted ethics approval to
a${<~M
hm survey aspects of eye health and care in Papua New Guinea
q/#pol (MRAC No. 05/13). This study was performed between
YG_|L[/# December 2004 and March 2005, and used the validated
F?+\J =LT World Health Organization (WHO) Rapid Assessment of
H ]z83:Z Cataract Surgical Services
L.?QZN%cN 5,6
fW=vN0Z protocol. Characterization of
9T#${NK cataract and its surgery in the 50 years and over age group
=n<Lbl(7 was part of that study.
:Xi&H.k)p As reported elsewhere,
|R&cQKaQ` 7
\k
6'[ln the sample size required, using a
10d.&vNw prevalence of bilateral cataract functional blindness (presenting
x/dyb. visual acuity worse than 6/60 in both eyes) of 5% in the
[9^lAhX target population, precision of
vzFo" ±
dym K @ 20%, with 95% confidence
IOT-R!.5V intervals (CI), and a design effect (deff) of 1.3 (for a cluster
g{^~g size of 30 persons), was estimated as 1169 persons. The
= glF6a sample frame used for the survey, based on logistics and
H<9_BA? security considerations, included Koki wanigela settlement
5=&ME(fmV in the Port Moresby area (an urban population), and Rigo
+"1fr
coastal district (a rural population, effectively isolated from
m+Kl
Port Moresby despite being only 2–4 h away by road). From
8b!xMFF" this sample frame, 39 clusters (with probability proportionate
*#9?9SYSk to population size) were chosen, using a systematic random
;,/4Ry22j- sampling strategy.
{l"(EeW6) Within each cluster, the supervisor chose households
hdeI/4 B using a random process. Residency was defined as living in
ik#ti=. that cluster household for 6 months or more over the past
d$^@$E2f year, and sharing meals from a common kitchen with other
Vi`P
&uPF members of the household. Eligible resident subjects aged
jO-T1P']Y 50 years and older were then enumerated by trained volunteers
}9kn;rb$g from the Port Moresby St John Ambulance Services.
2@W`OW Njm This continued until 30 subjects were enrolled. If the
Rl&nR$#
required number of subjects was not obtained from a particular
/dO*t4$ @? cluster, the fieldworkers completed enrolment in the
7g$*K0m` nearest adjacent cluster. Verbal informed consent was
IrUoAQ2xpG obtained prior to all data collection and examinations.
Oy b0t|do+ A standardized survey record was completed for each
b;FaTm@ participant. The volunteers solicited demographic and general
v"o_V| information, and any history of cataract surgery. They
a6@k*9D> also measured visual acuity. During a methodology pilot in
&kcmkRRG the Morata settlement area of Port Moresby, the kappa statistic
#"8'y for agreement between the four volunteers designated
fR?'HsQg to perform visual acuity estimations was over 0.85.
Ii#+JY0k The widely accepted and used ‘presenting distance visual
B2Rpd &[ acuity’ (with correction if the subject was using any), a measure
3xN_z?Rg of ocular condition and access to and uptake of eye care
I5)$M{#a services, was determined for each eye separately. This was
X#Ob^E%J done in daylight, using Snellen illiterate E optotypes, with
6VS_L@ four correct consecutive or six of eight showings of the
el\xMe^SY smallest discernible optotype giving the level. For any eye
1;PI%++ with presenting visual acuity worse than 6/18, pinhole acuity
~!M" was also measured.
re,}}' An ophthalmologist examined all eyes with a history of
&bGf{P*Da cataract surgery and/or reduced presenting vision. Assessment
RP^vx`9h of the anterior segment was made using a torch and
sgnc$x" loupe magnification. In a dimly lit room, through an undilated
{6%-/$LX pupil, the status of the visually important central lens
JNT|h zV was determined with a direct ophthalmoscope. An intact red
@iMF&\KC reflex was considered indicative of a ‘normal’ clear central
0fLd7*1> lens. The presence of obvious red reflex dark shading, but
}#2(WHf=< transparent vitreous, was recorded as lens opacity. Where
E^A!k=> present, aphakia and pseudophakia with and without posterior
{;m|\652B capsule opacification were noted. The lens was determined
52NI{" to be not visible if there were dense corneal opacities
oad /xbp@/ or other ocular pathologies, such as phthisis bulbi, precluding
[>U2!4=$M any view of the lens. The posterior segment was examined
yY*(!^S with a direct ophthalmoscope, also through an
ur7S
K(# undilated pupil.
eKLE^`2*@ A cause of vision loss was determined for each eye with
<>Ha<4A
=E a presenting visual acuity worse than 6/18. In the absence of
gzy|K%K any other findings, uncorrected refractive error was considered
CJDNS21m to be that cause if the acuity then improved to better
5iI(A'R[7 than 6/18 with pinhole. Other causes, including corneal
Dd,i^,4Gj opacity, cataract and diabetic retinopathy, required clinical
KfPgj findings of sufficient magnitude to explain the level of vision
9g'6zB loss. Although any eye may have more than one condition
G1*,~1i contributing to vision reduction, for the purposes of this
U_.}V study, a single cause of vision loss was determined for each
aT+w6{%Z eye. The attributed cause was the condition most easily
FQE(qltf, treated if each of the contributing conditions was individually
[wnaF|h treatable to a vision of 6/18 or better. Thus, for example,
ykH@kv Qt when uncorrected refractive error and lens opacity coexisted,
+EqL| refractive error, with its easier and less expensive treatment,
P_H_\KsH*( was nominated as the cause. Where treatment of a condition
B52dZ b present would not result in 6/18 or better acuity, it was
baL<|&
c determined to be the cause rather than any coincident or
94]i|2qj* associated conditions amenable to treatment. Thus, for
q}0I`$MU example, coincident retinal detachment and cataract would
R~|(]#com be categorized as ‘posterior segment pathology’.
2- (}=N Participants who were functionally blind (less than 6/60
>6@,L+-6r in the better eye) because of unoperated cataract were interrogated
#JY> about the reasons for not having surgery. The
-j:yE Z4Oy responses were closed ended and respondents had the option
cS2]?zI of volunteering more than one barrier, all of which were
!R#PJH/TM recorded in a piloted proforma. The first four reasons offered
]2ycJ >w were considered for analysis of the barriers to cataract
U z[#ye surgery.
B[
D
s?: Those eyes previously operated for cataract were examined
I3i zLi to characterize that surgery and the vision outcome. A
:f7vGO"t detailed history of the surgery was taken. This included the
}w2Et age at surgery, place of surgery, cost and the use of spectacles
+Jn\`4/J: afterward, including reasons for not wearing them if that was
L|1~'Fz#w the case.
l8_RA The Rapid Assessment of Cataract Surgical Services data
:Z_abKt entry and analysis software package was used. The prevalences
C@-cLk of visually significant cataract, unoperated blinding
Rz
FxO cataract and cataract surgery were determined. Where prevalence
UlKg2p estimates were age and gender adjusted for the population
4!-R&<TLve of PNG, the estimated population structure for the
#e[r0f?U 882 Garap
nPl,qcyY et al.
qg<Y^y © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
wyAh%'V year 2000
npbf>n^R 1
c?GV was used, and 95% CI were derived around these
$?VYHkX point estimates. Additional analysis for potential associations
#SjCKQ~ of cataract, its surgery and surgical outcomes employed the
nr(C*E STATA (version 8.0; StataCorp LP, TX, USA). Fisher’s exact
9
(_n8br1 test and the chi-square test for bivariate analysis and a multiple
f9IqcCSW logistic regression model for multivariate analysis were
z8)&ekG used. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% CI were estimated. A
=*>.z@WQ P
jMX|1b -
hAP2DeT$ value of
D4$"02" <
+Q[SddI 0.05 was taken as significant for this analysis.
Z[,,(M The Cataract Surgical Coverage (Eyes) (CSC(Eyes)) was
beV+3HqB8 calculated. This is a surgical service impact indicator. It measures
#!_ViG )2^ the proportion of cataract that has been operated on
q6%m .X7 in a defined population at a particular point in time, being
@ Yo*h"s the eyes having had cataract surgery as a percentage of the
C8}=fa3u combined total of all of those eyes operated with those
?#nk}=;g8 currently blind (less than 6/60) from cataract (CSC(Eyes) at
{?A/1q4rr 6/60
^?A>)?Sq =
q%)."10}] 100
1$:O9{F a
c{x:'@%/s' /(
zY-?Bv_D a
Y
7?q` +
(&_^1 b
$`lGPi(Jc ), where
9PaV*S(\TR a
fN9uSnu
=
t+,2 p|B pseudophakic
UA4MtTp` +
y`7b3*P aphakic eyes,
q!Z{qt*`um and
tCu.Fc@ b
>yLdrf =
[EQTrr(
D eyes with worse than 6/60 vision caused by cataract).
kp6 &e 8
NZ+TTMv The Cataract Surgical Coverage (Persons) (CSC(Persons))
=t|,6Vp was determined. This considers people with operated
}"/>, cataract (either or both eyes) as a proportion of those having
f%q ? operable cataract. (CSC(Persons) at 6/60
(SA^>r =
\#C]
|\ 100(
t"vkd x
l4U +
a/[)A _- y
`(E$-m-~jH )/
_s}`ohKvD (
O-3a
U!L x
A
P ]`'C +
!%N@>[ y
Q!r` G +
=VV><^uzdY z
/Zxq-9
), in which
{+EnJ" x
YdN]Tqc =
DHZ`y[&}|N persons with unilateral pseudophakia
F
1l8jB\ or unilateral aphakia and worse than 6/60 vision
ZX'3qW^D caused by cataract in the other eye,
vhDtjf/* y
sD|}?7 =
NPDMv
|4 persons with bilateral
#$}A$ sm previously operated cataract, and
!lBK!'0 z
5qFHy[IA =
lbC,*U^ persons with bilateral
d\25 cataract causing vision worse than 6/60 in each).
tYhcoV 8
7y_<BCx
h The Cataract Surgical Rate, being the number of cataract
$VF$Ok> operations per year per million of population, was also
R`B} T<* estimated.
dN7.W
R
?Cx=!k. ESULTS
OL_jU2,fv Of the 1191 people enumerated, 5 subjects were not available
y>)c?9X during the survey and 12 refused participation. Data
{|B[[W\TN from these 17 were not considered in the analysis. Of the
S#<y_w
% remaining 1174 (98.6%), 606 (51.6%) were female, and 914
%jHe_8=o (77.9%) were domiciled in rural Rigo.
>]o>iOz;] Cataract caused 35.2% of vision impairment (presenting
4Z5;y[k( vision less than 6/18) and 62.8% of functional blindness
5=%KK3 (presenting vision less than 6/60) in the 2348 eyes sampled
Kmw #Q` (Table 1). It was second to refractive error (45.7%)
&I%E8E 7
/)`]p1c1%w in the
MSRk|0Mcr former, and the leading cause of the latter.
w'E?L`c For the 1174 subjects, cataract was the most prevalent
,eWLi
g
cause of vision impairment (46.7%) and functional blindness
X(\L1N (75.0%) (Table 1). On bivariate analysis, increasing age
L&~' SC (
s
ZEa8 P
U3`?Z`i( <
pf%;* 0.001), illiteracy (
pjs4FZ`Pd; P
X
8-x$07) <
j%Xa8$ 0.001) and unemployment
adAdX;@e` (
+\)Y,@cw P
-GM"g
kz <
.wyuB;: 0.001) were associated with cataract-induced functional
I)s_f5' blindness. Gender was not significantly associated (
</1]eDnU P
w7&.Uqjf =
;r&Z?B$ 0.6).
M_>kefr In a multivariate model that included all variables found
vxLr034 significant in bivariate analysis, increasing age (reference category
_[-W*,xJ) 50–59 years; OR: 2.6, 95% CI: 1.6, 5.9 for persons
TbN{ex
* aged 60–69, OR: 9.8, 95% CI: 4.6, 20.6 for persons aged
>tx[UF@P@ 70–79, and OR: 18.6, 95% CI: 8.3, 41.9 for persons aged
r4DHALu#) 80 years and older) and illiteracy (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.3, 3.8)
#f HnM+ were associated with functional cataract blindness.
~P"Agpx3u The survey sample included 97 people (8.3%) who had
-sZb+2tDa previously undergone cataract surgery, for a total of 136 eyes
{@3v$W~7M (5.8%). On bivariate analysis, increasing age (
h/5S2EB0!O P
)tnbl"0 =
C/#pK2xY 0.02), male
G6}&k[d5% gender (
12m-$/5n+ P
6H5o/)Q~ =
ey,f igjd. 0.02), literacy (
hITYBPqRO P
Y:L[Iz95
o <
TI/RJF b 0.001) and employed status
1X5Yp |Ho (
&qWB\m P
-!\%##r7~ =
ZfH>UHft 0.03) were associated with cataract surgery. Illiteracy
:vzIc3~c:` was significantly associated with reduced uptake of cataract
jZPGUoRLg surgery (adjusted OR 0.43, 95% CI: 0.20, 0.91) in a multivariate
9+PA
yI#w model that adjusted for age, gender and employment
R@s7s%y= status.
iLNUydiS The CSC(Eyes) at 6/60 for the survey sample was
"~._G5i. 34.5%, and the CSC(Persons) at the same vision level was
VjNr<~ |d 45.3%.
unew
XHA Most cataract surgery occurred in a government hospital
C=@4U} (
<FBBR2 P
.5o~^ <
G9LWnyQt 0.001), more than 5 years ago (
.ml\z5 P
zow8 Q6f <
U5H%wA['m 0.001). Also, most
Z_xQ2uH$: of the intracapsular extractions were performed more than
fRLA;1va 5 years ago (
5X+
`aB P
O65`KOPn <
3en67l 0.001). Patients are now more likely to
0#eb] c receive intraocular lens surgery (
y&5
O) P
Ui
(nMEon <
%aMC[i 0.001). Although most
t,JX6ni surgery was provided free (
-V}xvSVg P
"``>
ii =
g=Xy{Vm
0.02), males, who were more
J( XDwt likely to have surgery (
iJ^}{- P
b3R(O| =
MQx1|>rG 0.02), were also more likely to
2XeyNX pay for it (
y,|2hrj/0E P
`G\Gk|4;2 =
6P717[ 0.03) (Table 2).
!(? 7V As measured by presenting acuity, the vision outcomes of
Q\kWQOB_ both intracapsular surgery and intraocular lens surgery were
=KOi#;1 poor (Table 3). However, 62.6% of those people with at least
UH%H9;
,$] Table 1.
6_QAE6A Vision impairment and blindness by eye and person; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
c YgJ}(>} Category 2348 eyes/1174 people surveyed
c(
U,FUS Vision impairment Blindness
7AT
8QC`u Eye (presenting
=O0A(ca"g visual acuity less than 6/18)
99ZWB Person (presenting visual
/KOI%x acuity less than 6/18 in the
q#mL-3OQ better eye)
sYDav)L. Eye (presenting visual
(i%bQZt^? acuity less than 6/60)
f|w;u!U( Person (presenting visual
&-Ch>:[
acuity less than 6/60 in the
!`?i>k?Q E better eye)
$%DoLpE> Total Cataract Total Cataract Total Cataract Total Cataract
T})q/oUqK n
8=L"rekV_ %
B3&C&o.h n
:stHc,
%
Rh~b," n
OeASB}
%
TxF^zx\ n
ohKoX$|p~ %
}W:Z>vam+ n
_xh)]R %
V':A! n
1T|")D %
q1u$Sm n
lBFKfLp& %
r&a}U6k(y n
H ;=^
W %
7O*Sg2B 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
R_/;U&R 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
D1-/#QN$1 70–79 years 252 26.5 119 35.5 106 28.8 57 33.1 133 32.4 94 36.4 42 35.0 34 37.8
Q]TZyk 80
q7KHx b +
mB>0$l y 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
}(u:K}8 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
sz270k%[ 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
!5De?OXe All cases 952 100 335 35.2 368 100 172 46.7 411 100 258 62.8 120 100 90 75
.-HM{6J Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 883
l2n`fZL
© 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
=dNE1rdzNa one eye operated on for cataract felt that their uncorrected
f:\)!
&W
vision, using either or both eyes, was sufficiently good that
v=G*K11@ spectacles were not required (Table 3).
X);'[/]E* ‘Lack of awareness of cataract and the possibility of surgery’
{,Vvm*L/ was the most common (50.1%) reason offered by 90
=\2gnk~ cataract-induced functionally blind individuals for not seeking
TC<Rg?&yb and undergoing cataract surgery. Males were more likely
6BA$v-VVU to believe that they could not afford the surgery (P = 0.02),
JL#LCU
? and females were more frequently afraid of undergoing a
>F7HKwg}Z cataract extraction (P = 0.03) (Table 4).
ef7 U7 DISCUSSION
.u
ikte The limitations of the standardized rapid assessment methodology
RYvdfj.ij used for this study are discussed elsewhere.7 Caution
L9e<hRZ
$ should be exercised when extrapolating this survey’s
u0+F2+ I Table 2. Circumstances of cataract surgery; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
LyvR].p=5* Category 136 cataract surgeries
yI|x
5f Male Female Aphakia
HTiLA%%6 (n = 74)
A40
5igF Pseudophakia
ML|?H1m> (n = 60)
o<lmU8xB= Couched
|H5GWZ
O{^ (n = 2)
]Zh$9YK Male, n (%) 83 (61.0) 45 (60.8) 38 (63.3) 0 (0.0)
xC9?rLUZ Female, n (%) 53 (39.0) 29 (39.2) 22 (36.7) 2 (100)
]Kjt@F"
; Undergone surgery in the last 5 years, n (%) 19 (22.9) 20 (37.7) 10 (13.5) 29 (48.3) 0 (0.0)
y,rdyt Range of age at the time of surgery, years 39–84 40–87 39–87 45–85 52
PJm@fK(j Age at the time of surgery, years, mean ± SD 61.3 ± 9.7 60.5 ± 11.6 60.8 ± 10.6 63.4 ± 10.9 52 ± 0.0
0s//&'*Q Surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 72 (86.7) 44 (83.0) 63 (85.1) 53 (88.3) 0 (0.0)
o8:9Yjs Surgery in a private hospital, n (%) 10 (12.1) 7 (13.2) 10 (13.5) 7 (11.7) 0 (0.0)
`Mg3P_}= Surgery in an eye camp, n (%) 1 (1.2) 0 (0.0) 1 (1.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
C=Fu1Hpb Surgery by traditionalist, n (%) 0 (0.0) 2 (3.8) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 2 (100)
_VgFuU$h
Totally free surgery, n (%) 32 (38.6) 26 (49.1)
E83$(6z Paid full price asked for surgery, n (%) 25 (30.1) 14 (26.4)
'tkQz Paid partial price asked for surgery, n (%) 26 (31.3) 13 (24.5)
g2?W@/pa Totally free surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 55 (47.4)
KY<
$+/B! Full price surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 23 (19.8)
*B@#A4f" Partially paid surgery in a government hospital, n (%) 38 (32.8)
C%<Dq0j Table 3. Characterization of cataract surgery outcomes; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea (2005)
$tW E9_ (a) 136 cataract surgeries
#+Bz$CO (b) 97 people with at least one eye operated on for cataract
>mvE[iXRG? (c) 67 (69.1%) cataract operated people not currently using distance correction: 38 (56.7%) male; 29 (43.3%) female
lBG=jOS Aphakia Pseudophakia Couched
#sF#<nHZ n % n % n %
/160pl4 Total 74 54.4 60 44.1 2 1.5
YVF@v-v-, Presenting vision 6/18 or better 27 36.5 24 40 0 0.0
"UY34a
^I Presenting vision worse than 6/60 40 54.1 11 18.3 2 100
@JdeOL; Aphakia Pseudophakia‡ Couched
=
C(BZ+-^ Unilateral† Bilateral n % n %
\cX9!lHl n % n %
e$QMR.' Total 28 28.9 17 17.5 51 52.6 1 1.0
c"CR_ Presenting vision 6/18 or better in better eye 15 53.6 11 64.7 35 68.6 0 0.0
suaP'0 Presenting vision worse than 6/60 in better eye 13 46.4 3 17.6 9 17.6 1 100
@$p6w
Reason n %
,=@WE>ip Never provided 20 29.9
)9/iH( Damaged 2 3.0
I%[Tosud< Lost 3 4.5
fCs{%-6cP Do not need 42 62.6
~k@{b& †Unilateral aphakes with an unoperated contralateral eye. ‡Bilateral pseudophakes (n = 9) + those with one eye aphakic and the other
fK(:vwh pseudophakic (n = 12) + unilateral pseudophakes with an unoperated contralateral eye (n = 30).
d"3x11| 884 Garap et al.
(yEU9R$I" © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
N7 _rVcDe results to the entire population of PNG. However, this
*fy aAv study’s results are the most systematically collected and
4},Y0 QXw objective currently available for eye care service planning.
!q/Q2 N( Based on this survey sample, the age-gender-adjusted
K-.%1d@$y prevalence of vision impairment from all causes for those
h^
WMv
*2 50 years and older in PNG is 29.2% (95% CI: 27.6, 35.1,
\:JY[s/ deff = 2.3), with 13.1% (95% CI: 11.3, 15.1, deff = 1.2) due
Yu[MNX;G to uncorrected refractive error.7 Cataract (7.4% [95% CI:
V^;lg[: 6.4, 10.2, deff = 1.3]) is the second most frequent cause. The
RWDPsZC adjusted prevalence for functional blindness from all causes
3-0jxx( in people aged 50 years and older is 8.9% (95% CI: 8.4, 12.0,
#~|esr/wf deff = 1.2),7 with cataract the leading cause at 6.4% (95%
fgo3Gy*# CI: 5.1, 7.3, deff = 1.1). This is typical of developing countries.
/bC@^Y&} However, atypically, it would seem that cataract blindness
t08[3Q& in PNG is not associated with female gender.9
jW| ,5,43 Assuming that ‘negligible’6 cataract blindness (less than
[>Zg6q
| 5% at visual acuity less than 3/60,8 although it may be as
*`bES V
: much as 10–15% at less than 6/6010) occurs in the under
@'
J~(#} 50 years age group, then, based on a 2005 population estimate
tM
:$H6m/( of 5.545 million, PNG would be expected to currently
Bq,Pk5b have 32 000 (25 000–36 000) cataract-blind people. An
gp{Z]{io additional 5000 people in the 50 years and older age group
]7|qhAh<L will have cataract-reduced vision (6/60 and better, but less
$M4C4_oPy than 6/18), along with an unknown number under the age of
EiA_9%< 50 years.
2m&
?t_W The age-gender-adjusted prevalence of those 50 years
gF~
} and older in PNG having had cataract surgery is 8.3% (95%
Ei@al>.\ CI: 6.6, 9.8, deff = 1.3). Prevalences for males and females,
8vvNn>Q respectively, are 10.2% (95% CI: 7.7, 12.7) and 6.4% (95%
Y$ZDJNz CI: 4.5, 8.4), with the expected9 association with male gender
c
8|&Q (age adjusted OR 1.6, 95% CI: 1.2, 2.1). Assuming negligible
Aacj? cataract surgery is performed on those under age
,z$U=uo 50 years (noting mean age and age range of surgery in
ixF Table 2), there would be about 41 400 people in PNG today
Hn?v/3 who have had this surgery. In the survey sample, 28.7% of
&!8u4*K5j surgery occurred in the last 5 years (Table 2). Assuming that
0t00X/ there have been no deaths, annual surgical numbers have
~0{F,R.$ been steady during this time, and a population mean of the
:\#/T,K" 2000 and 2005 estimates, this would equate to about 2400
VZU@G)rd people per year, being a Cataract Surgical Rate (CSR) of
iM{aRFL approximately 440 per million per year.
1uc;:N G= Unfortunately, no operation numbers are available from
x#tP)5n?s* the private Port Moresby facility, which contributed 12.5%
y]%Io]!d (Table 2) of the surgeries in this study. However, from
F:2V
; records and estimates, outreach, government and mission
ey[+"6Awne hospital surgical services perform approximately 1600 cataract
{(`xA,El surgeries per year. Excluding the private hospital, this
KrD?Z2x equates to a CSR of about 300 per million population per
#mc GT\tQ year.
kM @heFJb. Whatever the exact CSR, certainly less than the WHO
JVNp= ikK estimate of 716,11 the order of magnitude is typical of a
@RI\CqFHR country with PNG’s medical infrastructure, resourcing and
oOy_2fwZPp bureacratic capability.11 With the exception of the Christian
Ha20g/UN. Blind Mission surgeon, who performs in excess of 1000 cases
l=t$XWh! per year, PNG’s ophthalmologists operate, on average, on
i}e OWi fewer than 100 cataracts each per year. This is also typical.6
dy2<b+.. It will be evident that the current surgical capability in
p EbyQ[ PNG is insufficient to address the cataract backlog. The
c{K[bppJ* CSC(Persons) of 45.3%, relating directly to the prevalence
+d,Z_ 6F of bilateral cataract blindness, and CSC(Eyes) of 34.5%,
XVkCYh4, relating to the total surgical workload, are in keeping with
.Zv uhOn^ other developing countries.6,8,10 If an annual cataract blindness
R8<P}mv incidence of 20% of prevalence12 is accepted, and surgery
6.gk6 is only performed on one eye of each person, then 6400
4z> SI\Ss (5000–7200) surgeries need to be performed annually to meet
\L{V|}"X this. While just addressing the incidence, in time the backlog
d;O4)8> will reduce to near zero. This would require a three- or
l|&DI]gw fourfold increase in CSR, to about 1200. Despite planning
ua>YI for this and the best of intentions, given current circumstances
H^C$2 f in PNG, this seems unlikely to occur in the near future.
E*X-f" Increasing the output of surgical services of itself will be
w [7vxQ!- insufficient to reduce cataract-related blindness. As measured
@fG'X
by presenting acuity, the outcome of cataract surgery is poor
$z5 (Table 3). Neither the historical intracapsular or current
*3]_Huw< intraocular lens surgical techniques approach WHO outcome
tKKQli4Mn4 guidelines of more than 80% with 6/18 and better
]KE"|}B presenting vision, and less than 5% presenting functionally
|QB[f*y5 blind.13 Better outcomes are required to ensure scarce
>crFIkOJ Table 4. Reasons that cataract-blind (worse than 6/60) people do not seek or undergo cataract surgery; Koki and Rigo, Papua New Guinea
!omf>CW;ud (2005)
s'Wu \r' 90 people functionally blind due to cataract
c}r"O8M Responses by 41
T1_>qnSz males (45.6%)
}*9mNE Responses by 49
Ne9S90HsB6 females (54.4%)
.bvEE Responses by all
&Y3r'" n % n % n %
{ZIEIXWb2 Lack of awareness of cataract and the possibility of surgery 18 43.9 28 57.1 46 50.1
nBJ'ak Too old to do anything about vision 7 17.1 6 12.2 13 14.4
AD^Q`7K?uR Believes unable to afford surgery 10 24.4 7 14.3 17 18.9
FH7h?!|t No time available to attend surgery 4 9.8 6 12.2 10 11.1
JsD|igqF- Waiting for cataract to mature 4 9.8 5 10.2 9 10.0
Jwt_d}ns None available to accompany person to surgery 4 9.8 2 4.1 6 6.7
~D\zz }l Fear of the surgery 2 4.9 6 12.2 8 8.9
;Qq<5I"y Believes no services available 2 4.9 2 4.1 4 4.4
&-zW1wf Cataract and its surgery in Papua New Guinea 885
7X`]}z4g © 2006 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
KIXp+Z resources are well used.14 Routine monitoring of surgical
!\Vc#dslt activity and outcome, perhaps more likely to occur if done
0 n}2D7 manually, may contribute to an improvement.15,16 So too
'B yB1NL would better patient selection, as many currently choose not
5u=>~yK+ to wear postoperation correction because they see well
:`>bh enough with the fellow eye (Table 3). Improving access to
|e{ ^Yf4 refraction and spectacles will also likely improve presenting
DA_}pS" acuities (Table 3).
qN\?cW' Of those cataract blind in the survey, 50.1% claimed to
[PX%p;"D be unaware of cataract and the possibility of surgery
xVN(It7g (Table 4). However, even when arrangements, including
Tnoy#w}V
e transportation, were made for study participants with visually
h,|. qfUk significant cataract to have surgery in Port Moresby, not
*b8AN3! all availed themselves of this opportunity. The reasons for
.s-*aoj this need further investigation.
;u;_\k<qK Despite the apparent ignorance of cataract among the
sT'j36Nc<, population, there would seem little point in raising demand
_lrvK99 and expectations through health promotion techniques until
~$d(@
T& such time as the capacity of services and outcomes of surgery
1+9!W have been improved. Increasing the quantity and quality of
}'`}| pM$ cataract surgery need to be priorities for PNG eye care
#
11<=3Yj services. The independent Christian Blind Mission Goroka
(;9j#x and outreach services, using one surgeon and a wellresourced
GB4^ 4Ajx support team, are examples of what is possible,
. ZP$, both in output and in outcome. However, the real challenge
{Y|?~ha# is to be able to provide cataract surgery as an integrated part
w@WPp0mny of a functioning service offering equitable access to good eye
_N:GZLG health and vision outcomes, from within a public health
i
} 5M'~F system that needs major attention. To that end, registrar
4JRQ=T|P7I training and referral hospital facilities and practice are being
aC94g7)` improved.
Y<h6m]H It may be that the required cataract service improvements
jo'
V.]\ are beyond PNG’s under-resourced and managed public
f7/M _sx health system. The survey reported here provides a baseline
A1n4R against which progress may be measured.
nK}-^Ur ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
p<+Y;,+ The authors thankfully acknowledge the technical support
fp}5QUm- provided by Renee du Toit and Jacqui Ramke (The International
X?o6=)SC| Centre for Eyecare Education), Doe Kwarara (FHFPNG
pS2u&Y"u| Eye Care Program) and David Pahau (Eye Clinic, Port
m48Ab` Moresby General Hospital). Thanks also to the St Johns
$18?Q+?3 Ambulance Services (Port Moresby) volunteers and staff for
_2hZGC%&E their invaluable contribution to the fieldwork. This survey
|w{C!Q8l was funded in part by a program grant from New Zealand
2f
g
P Agency for International Development (NZAID) to The
+8Y|kC{9" Fred Hollows Foundation (New Zealand).
qh+&Z x~ REFERENCES
Tp|>(~;ai 1. National Statistical Office, Government of the Independent
bFSs{\zE State of PNG. Papua New Guinea 2000 Census. Port Moresby:
{eVv%sbq PNG Government, 2000.
v#EFklOP 2. Parsons G. Ophthalmic practice in Papua New Guinea. PNG
$z`l{F4eMf Med J 1975; 18: 79–82.
BS
]:w(}[ 3. Parsons G. A decade of ophthalmic statistics in Papua New
+cM~
| Guinea. PNG Med J 1991; 34: 255–61.
vqZBDQ0 4. Dethlefs R. The trachoma status and blindness rates of selected
U }AIOtUw areas of Papua New Guinea in 1979–80. Aust J Ophthalmol 1982;
^#IE
t# 10: 13–18.
P&Uj?et" 5. WHO. Rapid assessment of cataract surgical services. In: Vision
SSq4KFO1 2020: The Right to Sight: Developing an Action Plan Version 2 CDROM.
'rTJ*1i World Health Organization and International Agency
hxMV?\MYj for the Prevention of Blindness, 2004. Available from: http://
Zl{9G?abCT www.who.int/ncd/vision2020_actionplan/documents/raccs/ bDm7$
( installation_racss.htm
*tv\5KW G 6. Amansakhatov S, Volokhovskaya ZP, Afanasyeva AN, Limburg
+prUa
u* H. Cataract blindness in Turkmenistan: results of a national
MkhD*\D
/ survey. Br J Ophthalmol 2002; 86: 1207–10.
Y`#6MhFT7 7. Garap JN, Sheeladevi S, Shamanna BR et al. Blindness and
9aNOfs8( vision impairment in the elderly of Papua New Guinea. Clin
(G/(w%#7_ Experiment Ophthalmol 2006; 34: 335–41.
ANJL8t-m 8. Limburg H, Foster A. Cataract surgical coverage: an indicator
SUv'cld to measure the impact of cataract intervention programmes.
{9X mFa Community Eye Health J 1998; 11: 3–6.
~9xkiu5~ 9. Lewallen S, Courtright P. Gender and use of cataract surgical
|rG)Q0H, services in developing countries. Bull World Health Organ 2002;
00{a}@n 80: 300–3.
a
9{:ot8, 10. Bassett KL, Noertjojo K, Liu L et al. Cataract surgical coverage
IUDH"~f and outcome in the Tibet Autonomous Region of China. Br J
=@S
a\; Ophthalmol 2005; 89: 5–9.
/.=aA~| 11. WHO. State of the World’s Sight: Vision 2020: The Right to Sight:
lSlZ^.& 1999–2005. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2005.
QqRF?%7q"q 12. WHO. How to plan cataract intervention in a district. In: Vision
p2k`)=iX 2020: The Right to Sight: Developing an Action Plan Version 2 CDROM.
.9WOTti World Health Organization and International Agency
O9E:QN<U`* for the Prevention of Blindness, 2004. Available from: http://
EpQy;#=; www.who.int/ncd/vision2020_actionplan/contents/4.1.htm &3;"$P 13. WHO. Informal Consultation on Analysis of Blindness Prevention Outcomes.
,Q3OQ[Nmh WHO/PBL/98.68. Geneva: World Health Organization,
;']u}Nh 1998.
4(VV@:_% 14. Brian G, Ramke J, Szetu J et al. Towards standards of outcome
F\^8k /0 quality: a protocol for the surgical treatment of cataract in
@;$cX2 developing countries. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2006; 34: 383–
U#]
J5'i 7.
de)4)EzUP 15. Yorston D, Gichuhi S, Wood M et al. Does prospective monitoring
;6D3>Lm
improve cataract surgery outcomes in Africa? Br J Ophthalmol
S9]I[4 2002; 86: 543–7.
X7AxI\h 16. Limburg H. Monitoring cataract surgical outcomes: methods
KvEv0L<ky and tools. Community Eye Health J 2002; 15: 51–3.