Literature DB >> 20956271

Agreement of visual field interpretation among glaucoma specialists and comprehensive ophthalmologists: comparison of time and methods.

Albert P Lin1, L Jay Katz, George L Spaeth, Marlene R Moster, Jeffrey D Henderer, Courtland M Schmidt, Jonathan S Myers.   

Abstract

AIMS: To evaluate interobserver agreement and interpretation time for three clinically available formats of visual field presentation: serial Humphrey visual field (HVF), STATPAC2 and PROGRESSOR.
METHODS: 40 field series from the Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study were presented to eight glaucoma specialists and eight comprehensive ophthalmologists to determine whether each field series was stable or progressive. Interobserver agreement and agreement with Hodapp-Parrish-Anderson criteria were evaluated using κ statistics, and the interpretation time was compared.
RESULTS: For glaucoma specialists, median κ values for interobserver agreement were 0.47, 0.60 and 0.43 for HVF, STATPAC2 and PROGRESSOR, respectively. Respective κ values for comprehensive ophthalmologists were 0.43, 0.43 and 0.35. For glaucoma specialists, median κ values for agreement with Hodapp-Parrish-Anderson criteria were 0.52, 0.67 and 0.52 for HVF, STATPAC2 and PROGRESSOR, respectively. Respective κ values for comprehensive ophthalmologists were 0.41, 0.47 and 0.33. For glaucoma specialists, the mean±SD interpretation time for the series of 40 fields was 63.4±35.9, 57.1±23.1 and 41.1±15.3 min using HVF, STATPAC2 and PROGRESSOR, respectively. Respective interpretation times for comprehensive ophthalmologists were 72.9±38.3, 68.6±30.6 and 51±24.1 min. Interpretation time was decreased when STATPAC2 or PROGRESSOR was used rather than HVF. Time reduction was significant for glaucoma specialists using PROGRESSOR (p=0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: For glaucoma specialists, interobserver agreement and agreement with HPA criteria were moderate to substantial. For comprehensive ophthalmologists, interobserver agreement and agreement with HPA criteria were fair to moderate. Field interpretation time may be reduced clinically when using STATPAC2 or PROGRESSOR rather than HVF.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20956271     DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2010.186569

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


  9 in total

1.  Intra and interobserver agreement in the classification of fundus autofluorescence patterns in geographic atrophy secondary to age-related macular degeneration.

Authors:  Marc Biarnés; Jordi Monés; Fabio Trindade; Jordi Alonso; Luis Arias
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-10-28       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 2.  Functional assessment of glaucoma: Uncovering progression.

Authors:  Rongrong Hu; Lyne Racette; Kelly S Chen; Chris A Johnson
Journal:  Surv Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-04-26       Impact factor: 6.048

3.  Variability of Grading DR Screening Images among Non-Trained Retina Specialists.

Authors:  Andrzej Grzybowski; Piotr Brona; Tomasz Krzywicki; Magdalena Gaca-Wysocka; Arleta Berlińska; Anna Święch
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-05-31       Impact factor: 4.964

4.  Foundational Considerations for Artificial Intelligence Using Ophthalmic Images.

Authors:  Michael D Abràmoff; Brad Cunningham; Bakul Patel; Malvina B Eydelman; Theodore Leng; Taiji Sakamoto; Barbara Blodi; S Marlene Grenon; Risa M Wolf; Arjun K Manrai; Justin M Ko; Michael F Chiang; Danton Char
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2021-08-31       Impact factor: 14.277

5.  Classification and Statistical Trend Analysis in Detecting Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression.

Authors:  Cristiana Valente; Elisa D'Alessandro; Michele Iester
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-05-28       Impact factor: 1.909

6.  External Validation and Clinical Applicability of Two Optical Coherence Tomography-Based Risk Calculators for Detecting Glaucoma.

Authors:  Néstor Ventura-Abreu; Marc Biarnés; Sofia Batlle-Ferrando; María Teresa Carrión-Donderis; Rafael Castro-Domínguez; María Jesús Muniesa; Elena Millá; Javier Moreno-Montañés; Marta Pazos
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2022-07-08       Impact factor: 3.048

7.  Long-term progression of visual field defects and related factors in medically treated normal tension glaucoma.

Authors:  Keiji Yoshikawa; Kazunori Santo; Hiroko Hizaki; Masayo Hashimoto
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-01-31

8.  Remote Grading of the Anterior Chamber Angle Using Goniophotographs and Optical Coherence Tomography: Implications for Telemedicine or Virtual Clinics.

Authors:  Jack Phu; Henrietta Wang; Vincent Khou; Sophia Zhang; Michael Kalloniatis
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2019-09-25       Impact factor: 3.283

9.  [Glaucoma care in Germany-Results of a survey among German ophthalmologists-Part 1: diagnostics].

Authors:  Christian Wolfram; Alexander K Schuster
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2021-03-17       Impact factor: 1.059

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.