Literature DB >> 16024860

Clinical evaluation of frequency doubling technology perimetry using the Humphrey Matrix 24-2 threshold strategy.

P G D Spry1, H M Hussin, J M Sparrow.   

Abstract

AIMS: To evaluate performance of frequency doubling technology (FDT) perimetry using the Humphrey Matrix 24-2 thresholding program in a hospital eye service (HES) glaucoma clinic.
METHODS: A random sample of individuals referred consecutively to the HES for suspected glaucoma were examined with 24-2 threshold FDT in addition to routine clinical tests. The discriminatory power of FDT and standard automated perimetry (SAP) were assessed using glaucomatous optic nerve head appearance as the reference gold standard.
RESULTS: 48 of 62 eligible referred individuals were recruited. Glaucoma prevalence was 31%. Median test duration per eye was 5 minutes 16 seconds for FDT and 5 minutes 9 seconds for SAP. There was no significant difference (p = 0.184) between proportions of individuals with reliable test results (FDT 75%, SAP 63%). Using a clinically appropriate binary criterion for abnormal visual field, sensitivity and specificity levels were 100% and 26% respectively for FDT and 80% and 52% for SAP. Both tests had higher negative than positive predictive values with marginal differences between tests. Criterion free receiver operator characteristic analysis revealed minimal discriminatory power differences.
CONCLUSIONS: In a HES glaucoma clinic in which new referrals are evaluated, threshold 24-2 FDT testing with the Humphrey Matrix has performance characteristics similar to SAP. These findings suggest threshold testing using the FDT Matrix and SAP is comparable when the 24-2 test pattern is used.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16024860      PMCID: PMC1772764          DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2004.057778

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0007-1161            Impact factor:   4.638


  15 in total

1.  Frequency doubling technology perimetry for detection of glaucomatous visual field loss.

Authors:  K E Cello; J M Nelson-Quigg; C A Johnson
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 5.258

2.  Comparison of frequency doubling perimetry with humphrey visual field analysis in a glaucoma practice.

Authors:  Y Burnstein; N J Ellish; M Magbalon; E J Higginbotham
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 5.258

3.  Clinical comparison of frequency doubling technology perimetry and Humphrey perimetry.

Authors:  R Casson; B James; A Rubinstein; H Ali
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 4.638

4.  Screening for glaucomatous visual field loss with frequency-doubling perimetry.

Authors:  C A Johnson; S J Samuels
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 4.799

5.  Correcting lens system for perimetry.

Authors:  D B Henson; R A Earlam
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 3.117

6.  Frequency doubling perimetry and the detection of eye disease in the community.

Authors:  G A Cioffi; S Mansberger; P Spry; C Johnson; E M Van Buskirk
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  2000

7.  Screening for glaucoma with frequency-doubling technology and Damato campimetry.

Authors:  N Yamada; P P Chen; R P Mills; M M Leen; M F Lieberman; R L Stamper; D C Stanford
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  1999-11

8.  Frequency doubling technology perimetry using a 24--2 stimulus presentation pattern.

Authors:  C A Johnson; G A Cioffi; E M Van Buskirk
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 1.973

9.  Test-retest variability of frequency-doubling perimetry and conventional perimetry in glaucoma patients and normal subjects.

Authors:  B C Chauhan; C A Johnson
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 4.799

10.  A frequency-doubling perimetric study in normal-tension glaucoma with hemifield defect.

Authors:  Y Kondo; T Yamamoto; Y Sato; M Matsubara; Y Kitazawa
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 2.503

View more
  21 in total

1.  Responses of primate retinal ganglion cells to perimetric stimuli.

Authors:  William H Swanson; Hao Sun; Barry B Lee; Dingcai Cao
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2011-02-09       Impact factor: 4.799

2.  Interpretation of the Humphrey Matrix 24-2 test in the diagnosis of preperimetric glaucoma.

Authors:  Jin A Choi; Na Young Lee; Chan Kee Park
Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-01-30       Impact factor: 2.447

Review 3.  [Functional glaucoma diagnosis].

Authors:  C Erb; K Göbel
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 1.059

4.  [Importance of perimetric differential diagnostics in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma].

Authors:  C Erb; K Göbel
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 1.059

5.  Structural and Functional Evaluations for the Early Detection of Glaucoma.

Authors:  Katie A Lucy; Gadi Wollstein
Journal:  Expert Rev Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-09-14

6.  [Conventional perimetry. Antiquated or indispensable for functional glaucoma diagnostics?].

Authors:  F Tonagel; B Voykov; U Schiefer
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 1.059

7.  Clinical evaluation of a rapid, pupil-based assessment of retinal damage associated with glaucoma.

Authors:  Nicholas Wride; Majed Habib; Keith Morris; Steve Campbell; Scott Fraser
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-06-02

8.  Glaucoma diagnostic performance of humphrey matrix and standard automated perimetry.

Authors:  Yoon Pyo Nam; Seong Bae Park; Sung Yong Kang; Kyung Rim Sung; Michael S Kook
Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-10-22       Impact factor: 2.447

Review 9.  [Frequency-doubling technology : A new method for determining glaucomatous visual field defects].

Authors:  J Lamparter; A Schulze; E M Hoffmann
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 1.059

Review 10.  Diagnostic tools for glaucoma detection and management.

Authors:  Pooja Sharma; Pamela A Sample; Linda M Zangwill; Joel S Schuman
Journal:  Surv Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 6.048

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.