Literature DB >> 21825177

Influence of visual field testing frequency on detection of glaucoma progression with trend analyses.

Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi1, Reza Zarei, Joseph Caprioli.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To explore whether increased frequency of visual field testing leads to earlier detection of glaucoma progression with trend analyses.
METHODS: The visual fields of 468 eyes (381 patients) from the Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study with 10 or more reliable visual field tests and 3 or more years of follow-up were studied. Starting at year 1, every other visual field examination was deleted to create a low-frequency data set, and the original group was kept as the high-frequency data set. The proportion of progressing eyes and the time to progression were compared between the 2 data sets with global and pointwise linear regression criteria.
RESULTS: The median number of visual field examinations was 20 and 12 for the high- and low-frequency data sets, respectively. Based on primary mean deviation criteria, 204 eyes (43.6%) in the high-frequency data set and 160 eyes (34.2%) in the low-frequency data set progressed (P < .001), whereas 185 eyes (39.5%) in the high-frequency data set and 167 eyes (35.7%) in the low-frequency data set progressed according to pointwise linear regression (P = .02). The high-frequency data set was more likely to detect progression with mean deviation (hazard ratio [HR], 1.69 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.36-2.10]) or pointwise linear regression criteria (HR, 1.52 [95% CI, 1.21-1.90]). A similar number of improving eyes were detected with mean deviation criteria (HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.58-1.60]), but pointwise linear regression criteria were more likely to detect improvement in the high-frequency data set (HR, 2.27 [95% CI, 1.43-3.62]). The results did not significantly change after censoring data at 5 years.
CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the frequency of visual field testing leads to earlier detection of glaucoma progression, especially with global trend analyses. This finding has significant implications for the care of patients with glaucoma.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21825177     DOI: 10.1001/archophthalmol.2011.224

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0003-9950


  17 in total

1.  Applying theories and interventions from behavioral medicine to understand and reduce visual field variability in patients with vision loss.

Authors:  Collin Rozanski; Jennifer A Haythornthwaite; Gislin Dagnelie; Ava K Bittner
Journal:  Med Hypotheses       Date:  2014-05-09       Impact factor: 1.538

2.  Portsmouth visual field database: an audit of glaucoma progression.

Authors:  J F Kirwan; A Hustler; H Bobat; L Toms; D P Crabb; A I McNaught
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2014-05-30       Impact factor: 3.775

Review 3.  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

4.  Perimetric progression using the Visual Field Index and the Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study score and its clinical correlations.

Authors:  Juan Gros-Otero; Miguel Castejón; Javier Paz-Moreno; Dimitrios Mikropoulos; Miguel Teus
Journal:  J Optom       Date:  2014-09-01

5.  Longitudinal Macular Structure-Function Relationships in Glaucoma.

Authors:  Vahid Mohammadzadeh; Alessandro Rabiolo; Qiang Fu; Esteban Morales; Anne L Coleman; Simon K Law; Joseph Caprioli; Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2020-01-22       Impact factor: 12.079

6.  Can Visual Field Progression be Predicted by Confocal Scanning Laser Ophthalmoscopic Imaging of the Optic Nerve Head in Glaucoma? (An American Ophthalmological Society Thesis).

Authors:  John Danias; Janet Serle
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  2015

7.  Comparison of Methods to Detect and Measure Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression.

Authors:  Alessandro Rabiolo; Esteban Morales; Lilian Mohamed; Vicente Capistrano; Ji Hyun Kim; Abdelmonem Afifi; Fei Yu; Anne L Coleman; Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi; Joseph Caprioli
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2019-09-11       Impact factor: 3.283

8.  The Effect of Transitioning from SITA Standard to SITA Faster on Visual Field Performance.

Authors:  Alex T Pham; Pradeep Y Ramulu; Michael V Boland; Jithin Yohannan
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2021-03-30       Impact factor: 14.277

9.  New insights into measurement variability in glaucomatous visual fields from computer modelling.

Authors:  Richard A Russell; David F Garway-Heath; David P Crabb
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-30       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  A survey of attitudes of glaucoma subspecialists in England and Wales to visual field test intervals in relation to NICE guidelines.

Authors:  Rizwan Malik; Helen Baker; Richard A Russell; David P Crabb
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-05-03       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.