Cataract: A worldwide perspective  
back to contents
Correspondence:
International Centre for Eye Health
Institute of Ophthalmology
Bath Street
London
EC1V 9EL
E-mail: e.cartwright@ucl.ac.uk

Gordon J. Johnson
MD, FRCSC
 

Abstract

From population-based surveys around the world it is now clear that untreated cataract is by far the major cause of global blindness, accounting for over 20 million bilaterally blind people. Cataract is associated with ageing, but there appear to be several factors which increase the risk of an earlier onset. Until these risk factors are reduced by changes in life style or a specific preventive measure can be introduced, the treatment is by cataract surgery. A successful cataract service requires operating on sufficient numbers (output), good visual results (outcome) and adequate financial arrangements (outlay). Cataract surgery is the top priority of the new World Health Organisation Vision 2020 programme.

Keywords

World blindness, cataract risk factors, cataract surgery, Cataract Surgical Rate (CSR), Vision 2020

Historical perspective

When attention turned after World War II, in the 1950 and 60s, to the problem of untreated blindness in the developing countries, it was assumed that trachoma, the commonest infectious disease at that time, was also the leading cause of blindness. Much research was developed on the biology of the causative organism, Chlamydia trachomatis, the epidemiology of the disease, and how it could be controlled. It was not until 1981 that the first population-based survey of the magnitude and causes of blindness in a whole country, Nepal, was completed. This survey revealed that 72% of the 0.84% blindness was caused by cataract or the complications of cataract surgery. Trachoma accounted for only 2.4% of the total. In the next few years several other population-based epidemiological surveys were published, and in all of these cataract was found to be the largest cause of blindness. Table 1 gives examples of the prevalence of blindness and causes in some representative surveys.

The magnitude of the cataract problem

For international comparisons the World Health Organization (WHO) devised a definition of blindness: less than 3/60 in the better eye, with best correction (an alternative definition - visual field constriction of less than 10° around fixation - was included to allow for the disability produced by onchocerciasis and glaucoma). Other degrees of vision loss were also described: severe visual impairment is defined as corrected vision less than 6/60 but more than 3/60; visual impairment is defined as corrected vision less than 6/18 but more than 6/60. (It will be appreciated that these definitions automatically excluded refractive error as a cause of blindness or low vision. Therefore 'presenting' or 'functional' vision is more commonly recorded in recent surveys.)

Country
Date
Prevalence
Blindness by
WHO
definition (%)
Causes of Blindness
Cataract and complications
Trachoma
Other corneal opacities
Glaucoma
Nepal
Chad
The Gambia
The Gambia
India
SE Turkey
Morocco
1981
1985
1986
1996
1986-89
1989
1992
0.84
2.31
0.7
0.42
0.7
0.4
0.76
72.1
48.0
55.0
58.0
80.1
50.0
54.6
2.4
23.0
17.0
5.0
0.39
0.3
3.9
5.0
14.0
11.0
16.0
1.52
12.0
6.5
3.2
15.0
2.0
9.0
1.7
12.0
14.3
Table 1. Representative population surveys of blindness

 

Any of these levels can be used to indicate the magnitude of visual reduction due to cataract.

There is now no doubt that unoperated cataract remains far and away the major cause of both blindness and low vision throughout the world, making up at least 50% of blindness in most developing countries. The number of blind in the world in 1998 was estimated at 45 million, with 20 million due to cataract. Blindness is thought to be 50 million in 2001 and is projected, if present trends continue, to reach 75 million by 2020. Of these, unoperated cataract may be expected to account for at least 35 million. This figure is equivalent to the combined present total populations of Australia, New Zealand, Sweden and Denmark. Three times as many will have visual impairment or severe visual impairment, another 100 million. The burden of cataract is increasing remorselessly, as illustrated in (Figure 1)1. There is very little information on the incidence of new cases of cataract, but Minassian and Mehra measured the number of new cases over 4 years in a central area of India: when projected to the whole population of India, 3.8 million people were becoming blind from cataract each year.

Causation and risk factors

Cataracts consist of an aggregation and denaturation of the lens proteins which are normally regularly dispersed and which have molecules small enough relative to the wavelength of light not to interfere with its transmission. It is probable that if we lived long enough, we would all eventually develop lens opacities. A recent population survey in Melbourne found that by the age of 90, 100% of males had a significant degree of nuclear cataract and 60% had cortical lens opacities as well, with females having prevalences almost as high2. But while age is the major risk factor, some people develop lens opacities at an earlier age than others. It has recently been shown by studies of monozygotic and dizygotic twins in the UK that in the case of nuclear cataract 50% of this variation can be accounted for by genetic factors3. The other factors are presumed to be environmental.

Risk factors are characteristics, attributes or exposures that increase an individual's risk of developing a cataract. There are many studies, in different countries, and these have been reviewed4; a list of probable and possible factors is given in Table 2. Almost none of the factors are found consistently across all the studies in different continents. Some factors are associated more with cortical, some with nuclear and some with posterior subcapsular (PSC) lens opacities.

Definite
Age
Probable Gender (female)
Smoking
Diabetes
Corticosteroid use
Sunlight exposure
Dehydrational crisis/heatstroke
Low social class
Possible
Low height
Low weight
Low body-mass
Limited education
Alcohol
Oestrogens
Hypertension
Renal failure
Myopia
Rural residence
Possible protective factors Aspirin
Antioxidant vitamins
Table 2. Risk factors for cataract.

 

Cigarette smoking has been associated with nuclear cataract both in the UK and USA. Nutritional factors are likely to play a part, and cataract is more common in diabetics and people with renal failure. The role of ultraviolet light is controversial. Individual exposure to ambient UVB in sunlight has been associated with cortical cataracts in otherwise fit fishermen in Chesapeake Bay and with cortical, nuclear and PSC in Australia. But other studies are not consistent, and it is not clear how much this factor contributes to the overall global burden of blindness due to cataract.

A cardinal question is, 'Why is cataract so much more frequent in developing countries such as India, and why does it come on at an earlier age than in industrialised countries?' A consistent finding in studies of aetiology in India has been the association with low socio-economic status and low educational level. This factor may point to malnutrition in infancy, possibly malnutrition in the mother and repeated severe infections in infancy. An important finding in the hot central part of India (where temperatures go up to 45°C and sometimes 50°C) is an association with severe dehydrational crises (a cholera-like illness) and heatstroke. Thus the early presentation of cataract in these poor people may represent repeated insults to the body proteins earlier in life. As with ageing in general, lens opacity comes about through the gradual build-up of unrepaired faults in the cells and tissues of our lenses as we live our lives.

Prevention of blindness from cataract

Prevention of a bad functional outcome of any disease is typically described at 3 levels:

1. Primary prevention: preventing the disease occurring in the first place;

2. Secondary prevention: once the disease has occurred, preventing it giving rise to a disability; in the case of cataract, we have various surgical procedures to remove the damaged lens;

3. Tertiary prevention: where a loss of function cannot be prevented, providing remedial measures to prevent it becoming a handicap.

Primary prevention

If we can discover more precisely the nature of these faults in the lens, we can hope to slow their accumulation. It may be expected that general public health measures, and a better standard of living, will delay both the age of onset and the rate of progression of cataracts, especially for poorer people in developing countries. Improved living standards include good nutrition in pregnancy and childhood, and provision of clean water. Gastro-intestinal infections leading to severe diarrhoea should be treated promptly before dehydration sets in. If there were not already enough reasons to stop cigarette smoking, cataract is another one.

There is not yet evidence from clinical trials that any of the drugs that are claimed to delay the progression of cataract are effective.

Secondary prevention

Until improved personal lifestyles become widespread, or until a specific method of prevention becomes available, the only way to reduce unnecessary visual impairment due to cataract is by surgery. Even in the most optimistic scenario, cataract extraction will continue to be required for the oldest segment of the population. The questions which must be addressed are: 'How many cataract operations need to be done in different settings?', 'How good are the results?', and 'How can these operations be paid for and the service be sustained?'

Output

We have already noted above that in 1998, WHO estimated that there was a backlog of 20 million people blinded by cataract, and it is thought that globally at least 25 million eyes reach a vision of less than 6/60 each year due to cataract.

The number of cataract operations performed each year per million inhabitants is referred to as the Cataract Surgical Rate (CSR). At present, this varies from 100 in Nigeria and 450 in Kenya to 3,100 in India, 3,800 in the UK and 5,500 in USA. Australia at present appears to have the highest rate at 6,300 operations per million people each year. Table 3 gives estimated CSR for different WHO regions1.

WHO Region
Population
(millions)
No of Cataract Operations
per year (millions)
Cataract Surgical Rate (operations/million/year)
Africa
Eastern Mediterranean
Western Pacific
Europe
    Western
    Eastern & Central
South East Asia
Americas
    North
    Central & South
650
500
1650
900
400
500
1500
800
300
500
0.2
0.5
1.65
2.1
1.6
0.5
3.6
2.15
1.65
0.5
300
1000
1000
2300
4000
1000
2400
2700
5500
1000
Table 3. Estimates of cataract surgery (1999)1*
* updated by A. Foster

 

The relatively low level for Europe is explained by the CSR of 1000 for the 500 million people of East and Central Europe (including Russia and the independent Asian republics) compared with a CSR or 4000 for the 400 million people of Western Europe. Similarly the rate for Central and South America is 1000, compared with 5,500 for USA and Canada. The level of visual acuity at which a cataract is considered operable will vary according to the circumstances in a particular country. Thus in some African countries there are so few cataract surgeons that it is appropriate to operate only on those blind (<3/60). Taylor has calculated that the less than 6/60 CSR will have to double if the cut off moves from less than 6/60 to less than 6/24, and 5 times if it moves to less than 6/125.

The traditional type of surgery in eye camps in India and neighbouring countries has been intracapsular cataract extraction with aphakic spectacle correction. Increasingly, even in eye camps, surgeons are changing to extracapsular cataract extraction with an intraocular lens. This change may result in people coming forward for surgery at earlier levels of visual impairment, and surgical services tend to go to men who can afford the IOL at the expense of women and people with more severe visual impairment. There has been a tremendous effort in India to increase the number of cataract operations to more than 3 million per year (CSR over 3,000) but this rate is not yet keeping pace with the backlog of cataract blindness plus the incidence of new cases.

Even where surgeons are available and there is the capacity to do more surgery, many people are not coming forward. The barriers, which include cost of surgery and cost of transport, as well as fear of surgery, are being intensively studied in different countries so that new approaches can be put in place. The cost of surgery has been much reduced since high quality intraocular lenses have become available for $7 or less by local manufacture in India (Aravind Eye Hospital) or Nepal, Eritrea and Vietnam (Fred Hollows Foundation).

Outcome

Poor visual results will also lead to low take-up of surgery. Recent measurement of the results of large volume cataract surgery have shown that the visual outcome is often not as good as had been thought6. The emphasis of programmes has therefore shifted to some extent from numbers to quality. Factors which lead to poor quality of final vision can be considered under four headings:

Selection: pre-existing disease such as advanced glaucoma or macular degeneration.

Surgery: complications at the time of surgery or in the early post-operative period.

Spectacles: refers to the uncorrected refractive error, whether with a standard power of aphakic glasses, or inaccurate IOL power which has not been corrected further.

Sequelae: long-term surgical complications such as uveitis or posterior capsular opacification (20% of eyes after 2 years, 50% after 5 years). These complications emphasizes the need for good follow-up.

Careful attention must be paid to each one of these elements if consistently good results are going to be obtained. Work is presently going on to develop simple tally sheets and more elaborate pro-formas and computer software so that everywhere cataract surgeons can monitor their own results.

Outlay

In order to have sustainable services year after year, the costs must be kept under control and revenue maintained. As well as lower costs for IOLs, inexpensive locally produced sutures and other consumables are becoming available. Many different models of cost-recovery are being tried, such as asking patients to pay for the IOL and charging for the use of private rooms.

Tertiary Prevention

Residual disability can be reduced to a minimum by providing best possible refraction or low vision aids where there is co-incident disease or complications. Thus the disability may often be prevented from becoming a severe handicap.

The Vision 2020 Programme

A new programme for the global elimination of avoidable blindness was launched in 1999 by the WHO and the International Agency for the Prevention of Blindness. It is called 'Vision 2020 - the Right to Sight'. The 3 elements of this programme are the control of major causes of blindness; human resource development; and development of infrastructure and appropriate technology. Amongst the 5 high-priority causes targeted in the first five years the most important is cataract (the others are trachoma, onchocerciasis, childhood blindness, and refractive errors, including provision for low vision services). For the next several years the major initiative will be to focus on the biggest burden of blindness - that due to cataract.

 
back to top
 

1. Foster A. Vision 2020: the cataract challenge. J Comm Eye Health 2000; 13: 17-19. (Estimates updated by Foster.)

2. McCarty CA, Mukesh BN, Fu CL, et al. The epidemiology of cataract in Australia. Am J Ophthalmol 1999; 128: 446-465.

3. Hammond CJ, Sneider H, Spector TD, et al. Genetic and environmental factors in age-related nuclear cataracts in monozygotic and dizygotic twins. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 1786-1790.

4. Dolin P. Epidemiology of cataract. In Johnson GJ, Minassian DC, Weale R editors: The Epidemiology of Eye Disease, Chapman & Hall, London 1998.

5. Taylor H. Cataract: how much surgery do we have to do? Br J Ophthalmol 2000; 84: 1-2.

6. Limburg H, Foster A, Vaidyanathan K et al. Monitoring visual outcome of cataract surgery: results from India. Bull World Health Org 1999; 77: 104-109.