[Comparative study of various perimetry strategies].

The conventional 4/2 dB bracketing strategy with fixed steps was compared with the "dynamic step unit strategy" (DSU strategy), which is characterized by an increase of step size with defect depth. In order to analyze the intraindividual variability, 6 eyes of 3 normal subjects were tested ten times with both strategies using the PERISTAT 433. The reproducibility of the DSU strategy is better by a factor of approximately 1.1 The comparative examination of 40 eyes of 40 patients with visual field defects resulting from various pathologic conditions using both the Humphrey-Field-Analyzer (program 30-2, 4/2 dB bracketing strategy) and the Peristat 433 (DSU strategy) yielded a clear advantage (by a factor of 3) in time and a lower number of exposures for the DSU strategy. In order to analyze the reproducibility, 15 eyes of 15 patients were tested three times with both methods. The reproducibility of the DSU strategy for relative defects is worse by a factor of 1.6. Overall, the DSU strategy is substantially faster than the conventional 4/2 dB bracketing strategy; this is achieved, however, at the expense of accuracy in relative defects.