Literature DB >> 21243371

Uniocular and binocular fields of rotation measures: Octopus versus Goldmann.

Fiona J Rowe1, Sahira Hanif.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the range of ocular rotations measured by Octopus versus Goldmann perimetry.
METHODS: Forty subjects (20 controls and 20 patients with impaired ocular movements) were prospectively recruited, age range 21-83 years. Range of uniocular rotations was measured in six vectors corresponding to extraocular muscle actions: 0°, 67°, 141°, 180°, 216°, 293°. Fields of binocular single vision were assessed at 30° intervals. Vector measurements were utilised to calculate an area score for the field of uniocular rotations or binocular field of single vision. Two test speeds were used for Octopus testing: 3°/ and 10°/second.
RESULTS: Test duration was two thirds quicker for Octopus 10°/second than for 3°/second stimulus speed, and slightly quicker for Goldmann. Mean area for control subjects for uniocular field was 7910.45 degrees(2) for Goldmann, 7032.14 for Octopus 3°/second and 7840.66 for Octopus 10°/second. Mean area for patient subjects of right uniocular field was 8567.21 degrees(2) for Goldmann, 5906.72 for Octopus 3°/second and 8806.44 for Octopus 10°/second. Mean area for left uniocular field was 8137.49 degrees(2) for Goldmann, 8127.9 for Octopus 3°/second and 8950.54 for Octopus 10°/second. Range of measured rotation was significantly larger for Octopus 10°/second speed.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the Octopus perimeter is an acceptable alternative method of assessment for uniocular ductions and binocular field of single vision. Speed of stimulus significantly alters test duration for Octopus perimetry. Comparisons of results from both perimeters show that quantitative measurements differ, although qualitatively the results are similar. Differences per mean vectors were less than 5° (within clinically accepted variances) for both controls and patients when comparing Goldmann to Octopus 10°/second speed. However, differences were almost 10° for the patient group when comparing Goldmann to Octopus 3°/second speed. Thus, speed of stimulus must be considered if wishing to use these perimeters interchangeably.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21243371     DOI: 10.1007/s00417-010-1596-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0721-832X            Impact factor:   3.117


  5 in total

1.  The usefulness of the cervical range of motion device in the ocular motility examination.

Authors:  B J Kushner
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2000-07

2.  Uniocular fields of fixation in thyroid eye disease.

Authors:  D H Steel; H B Hoh; M J Potts; R A Harrad
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 3.775

3.  Comparing methods of measurement: why plotting difference against standard method is misleading.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1995-10-21       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  A modified method for measuring uniocular fields of fixation: reliability in healthy subjects and in patients with Graves orbitopathy.

Authors:  Helen Haggerty; Sarah Richardson; Keith W Mitchell; A Jane Dickinson
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2005-03
  5 in total
  3 in total

1.  Accuracy of kinetic perimetry assessment with the Humphrey 850; an exploratory comparative study.

Authors:  Fiona J Rowe; Lauren R Hepworth; Kerry L Hanna; Meera Mistry; Carmel P Noonan
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2019-07-22       Impact factor: 3.775

2.  Incidence and clinical presentation of moderate to severe graves' orbitopathy in a Danish population before and after iodine fortification of salt.

Authors:  Peter Laurberg; Dalia C Berman; Inge Bülow Pedersen; Stig Andersen; Allan Carlé
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2012-04-19       Impact factor: 5.958

3.  Evaluation of Ocular Versions in Graves' Orbitopathy: Correlation between the Qualitative Clinical Method and the Quantitative Photographic Method.

Authors:  Cristiane de Almeida Leite; Thaís de Sousa Pereira; Jeane Chiang; Allan C Pieroni Gonçalves; Mário L R Monteiro
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-07-31       Impact factor: 1.909

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.