Literature DB >> 2589053

The influence of the learning effect on automated perimetry in patients with suspected glaucoma.

J M Wild1, M Dengler-Harles, A E Searle, E C O'Neill, S J Crews.   

Abstract

The influence of the learning effect on the outcome of automated perimetry was studied as a function of eccentricity. The same comprised 20 patients with suspected glaucoma who were all naive to automated perimetry. Visual field examination of the right eye followed by that of the left eye was undertaken on each of three successive days and after a further interval of 12 days using a customized full-field program of the Humphrey Field Analyser 630 (stimulus size III). The program comprised 60 points out to an eccentricity of 60 degrees with an interstimulus grid of 12 degrees. Global, central, peripheral, superior and inferior mean sensitivity each significantly increased (P less than or equal to 0.01) from the first to the second right eye examinations and from the third to the fourth left eye examinations (P less than or equal to 0.01). The global short-term fluctuation, central mean defect and number of stimulus presentations decreased from the first to the second right eye examination (P 0.01). The order of examination between eyes and the interval between examination sessions influences the response recorded by automated perimetry.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2589053     DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.1989.tb04105.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh)        ISSN: 0001-639X


  18 in total

1.  Are rates of vision loss in patients in English glaucoma clinics slowing down over time? Trends from a decade of data.

Authors:  T Boodhna; L J Saunders; D P Crabb
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 3.775

2.  The learning and fatigue effect in automated perimetry.

Authors:  G Marra; J Flammer
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 3.117

3.  Field loss after pan retinal photocoagulation with diode and argon lasers.

Authors:  S Buckley; L Jenkins; L Benjamin
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 2.379

4.  Baseline alterations in blue-on-yellow normal perimetric sensitivity.

Authors:  J M Wild; I D Moss
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 3.117

5.  A novel strategy for the estimation of the general height of the visual field in patients with glaucoma.

Authors:  Iván Marín-Franch; William H Swanson; Victor E Malinovsky
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-03-18       Impact factor: 3.117

6.  The influence of forward light scatter on the visual field indices in glaucoma.

Authors:  M Dengler-Harles; J M Wild; M D Cole; E C O'Neill; S J Crews
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 3.117

7.  Evaluation of FASTPAC: a new strategy for threshold estimation with the Humphrey Field Analyser.

Authors:  J G Flanagan; I D Moss; J M Wild; C Hudson; L Prokopich; D Whitaker; E C O'Neill
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 3.117

8.  The influence of stimulus parameters on the visual field indices by automated projection perimetry.

Authors:  M Dengler-Harles; J M Wild; M D Cole; E C O'Neill
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 3.117

9.  Is there evidence for continued learning over multiple years in perimetry?

Authors:  Stuart K Gardiner; Shaban Demirel; Chris A Johnson
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 1.973

10.  [Practical aspects of glaucoma perimetry].

Authors:  J Weber
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 1.059

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.