Literature DB >> 11444634

Senescent changes of the normal visual field: an age-old problem.

P G Spry1, C A Johnson.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To examine the effect of normal aging on visual field sensitivity and identify the best-fitting function for normal populations.
METHODS: Full Threshold standard automated perimetry data (program 24-2, Humphrey Field Analyzer) was collated retrospectively from clinically normal subjects who had previously been recruited for studies of normal visual function. One eye of each subject was randomly selected for analysis. Linear, bilinear, and simple nonlinear candidate functions of mean sensitivity vs. age (independent variable) were applied to these cross-sectional population data. Differences in the aging effect by eccentricity and hemifield were also considered.
RESULTS: Data from 562 normal eyes were available for analysis. A significant negative relationship existed between age and mean visual field sensitivity within the cross-sectional population data. Coefficients of determination for the linear, bilinear, and nonlinear functions were 0.21, 0.20, and 0.26, respectively, indicating that the nonlinear function provided best characterization of the effect of age on mean sensitivity. A small but significant increase in the aging effect was present both peripherally (p < 0.001) and superiorly (p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: The nonlinear function that provided the best fit to cross-sectional population data indicates that age exerts an increasing effect on perimetric sensitivity with age, which has implications for clinical devices that use linear age coefficients to correct for normal aging effects. A linear age correction will overestimate aging changes for younger subjects and, therefore, may miss early pathologic changes in visual sensitivity. Conversely, linear age correction will also underestimate aging changes for older subjects and, thus, may overcall pathological sensitivity loss in this group. The effect of age within subjects requires further investigation to provide reliable estimates of the effect of age on sensitivity.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11444634     DOI: 10.1097/00006324-200106000-00017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Optom Vis Sci        ISSN: 1040-5488            Impact factor:   1.973


  37 in total

1.  Neuroretinal basis of visual impairment in the very elderly.

Authors:  John Vincent Lovasik; Marie-Jeanne Kergoat; Lisette Justino; Hélène Kergoat
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2002-12-19       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Characteristics of the normative database for the Humphrey matrix perimeter.

Authors:  Andrew John Anderson; Chris A Johnson; Murray Fingeret; John L Keltner; Paul G D Spry; Michael Wall; John S Werner
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 4.799

3.  Ganglion cell loss and age-related visual loss: a cortical pooling analysis.

Authors:  Pauline M Pearson; Laura A Schmidt; Emily Ly-Schroeder; William H Swanson
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 1.973

4.  Modeling the effects of aging on retinal ganglion cell density and nerve fiber layer thickness.

Authors:  Ronald S Harwerth; Joe L Wheat
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2007-10-13       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 5.  Ageing and visual field data.

Authors:  Paolo Brusini
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 4.638

6.  Perimetric evaluation of saccadic latency, saccadic accuracy, and visual threshold for peripheral visual stimuli in young compared with older adults.

Authors:  David E Warren; Matthew J Thurtell; Joy N Carroll; Michael Wall
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2013-08-27       Impact factor: 4.799

7.  What rates of glaucoma progression are clinically significant?

Authors:  Luke J Saunders; Felipe A Medeiros; Robert N Weinreb; Linda M Zangwill
Journal:  Expert Rev Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-05-13

8.  Normative Databases for Imaging Instrumentation.

Authors:  Tony Realini; Linda M Zangwill; John G Flanagan; David Garway-Heath; Vincent M Patella; Chris A Johnson; Paul H Artes; Ian B Gaddie; Murray Fingeret
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 2.503

9.  Aging and visual counting.

Authors:  Roger W Li; Manfred MacKeben; Sandy W Chat; Maya Kumar; Charlie Ngo; Dennis M Levi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-10-18       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Comparative regional pupillography as a noninvasive biosensor screening method for diabetic retinopathy.

Authors:  Maria Carolina Ortube; Alexander Kiderman; Yakov Eydelman; Fei Yu; Nelson Aguilar; Steven Nusinowitz; Michael B Gorin
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2013-01-02       Impact factor: 4.799

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.