PURPOSE: To evaluate the ability of various screening tests, both individually and in combination, to detect glaucoma in the general Latino population and high-risk subgroups. METHODS: The Los Angeles Latino Eye Study is a population-based study of eye disease in Latinos 40 years of age and older. Participants (n = 6082) underwent Humphrey visual field testing (HVF), frequency doubling technology (FDT) perimetry, measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) and central corneal thickness (CCT), and independent assessment of optic nerve vertical cup disc (C/D) ratio. Screening parameters were evaluated for three definitions of glaucoma based on optic disc, visual field, and a combination of both. Analyses were also conducted for high-risk subgroups (family history of glaucoma, diabetes mellitus, and age ≥65 years). Sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated for those continuous parameters independently associated with glaucoma. Classification and regression tree (CART) analysis was used to develop a multivariate algorithm for glaucoma screening. RESULTS: Preset cutoffs for screening parameters yielded a generally poor balance of sensitivity and specificity (sensitivity/specificity for IOP ≥21 mm Hg and C/D ≥0.8 was 0.24/0.97 and 0.60/0.98, respectively). Assessment of high-risk subgroups did not improve the sensitivity/specificity of individual screening parameters. A CART analysis using multiple screening parameters-C/D, HVF, and IOP-substantially improved the balance of sensitivity and specificity (sensitivity/specificity 0.92/0.92). CONCLUSIONS: No single screening parameter is useful for glaucoma screening. However, a combination of vertical C/D ratio, HVF, and IOP provides the best balance of sensitivity/specificity and is likely to provide the highest yield in glaucoma screening programs.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the ability of various screening tests, both individually and in combination, to detect glaucoma in the general Latino population and high-risk subgroups. METHODS: The Los Angeles Latino Eye Study is a population-based study of eye disease in Latinos 40 years of age and older. Participants (n = 6082) underwent Humphrey visual field testing (HVF), frequency doubling technology (FDT) perimetry, measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP) and central corneal thickness (CCT), and independent assessment of optic nerve vertical cup disc (C/D) ratio. Screening parameters were evaluated for three definitions of glaucoma based on optic disc, visual field, and a combination of both. Analyses were also conducted for high-risk subgroups (family history of glaucoma, diabetes mellitus, and age ≥65 years). Sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated for those continuous parameters independently associated with glaucoma. Classification and regression tree (CART) analysis was used to develop a multivariate algorithm for glaucoma screening. RESULTS: Preset cutoffs for screening parameters yielded a generally poor balance of sensitivity and specificity (sensitivity/specificity for IOP ≥21 mm Hg and C/D ≥0.8 was 0.24/0.97 and 0.60/0.98, respectively). Assessment of high-risk subgroups did not improve the sensitivity/specificity of individual screening parameters. A CART analysis using multiple screening parameters-C/D, HVF, and IOP-substantially improved the balance of sensitivity and specificity (sensitivity/specificity 0.92/0.92). CONCLUSIONS: No single screening parameter is useful for glaucoma screening. However, a combination of vertical C/D ratio, HVF, and IOP provides the best balance of sensitivity/specificity and is likely to provide the highest yield in glaucoma screening programs.
Authors: Azfar C Wadood; Augusto Azuara-Blanco; Peter Aspinall; Abdel Taguri; Anthony J W King Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Mae O Gordon; Julia A Beiser; James D Brandt; Dale K Heuer; Eve J Higginbotham; Chris A Johnson; John L Keltner; J Philip Miller; Richard K Parrish; M Roy Wilson; Michael A Kass Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2002-06
Authors: Michael A Kass; Dale K Heuer; Eve J Higginbotham; Chris A Johnson; John L Keltner; J Philip Miller; Richard K Parrish; M Roy Wilson; Mae O Gordon Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2002-06
Authors: Graham Mowatt; Jennifer M Burr; Jonathan A Cook; M A Rehman Siddiqui; Craig Ramsay; Cynthia Fraser; Augusto Azuara-Blanco; Jonathan J Deeks Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2008-07-09 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Xiaoyi Gao; W James Gauderman; Yutao Liu; Paul Marjoram; Mina Torres; Talin Haritunians; Jane Z Kuo; Yii-Der I Chen; R Rand Allingham; Michael A Hauser; Kent D Taylor; Jerome I Rotter; Rohit Varma Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2013-04-01 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Lisa Hark; Michael Waisbourd; Jonathan S Myers; Jeffrey Henderer; John E Crews; Jinan B Saaddine; Jeanne Molineaux; Deiana Johnson; Harjeet Sembhi; Shayla Stratford; Ayman Suleiman; Laura Pizzi; George L Spaeth; L Jay Katz Journal: Ophthalmic Epidemiol Date: 2016-03-07 Impact factor: 1.648
Authors: Nils A Loewen; Xinbo Zhang; Ou Tan; Brian A Francis; David S Greenfield; Joel S Schuman; Rohit Varma; David Huang Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2015-03-20 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: David Fleischman; John P Berdahl; Jana Zaydlarova; Sandra Stinnett; Michael P Fautsch; R Rand Allingham Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-12-26 Impact factor: 3.240