Literature DB >> 2732022

Variability of automated visual fields in clinically stable glaucoma patients.

E B Werner1, B Petrig, T Krupin, K I Bishop.   

Abstract

The total variability of the visual field was measured in 20 patients with open-angle glaucoma who appeared to be clinically stable and well controlled on medical therapy. All patients had at least four visual fields performed on the Octopus 201 perimeter with at least 12 months follow-up since their first visual field. The four most recently performed visual fields were analyzed. Two different methods for calculating total variability were used. One was based on the variance of the threshold determinations and the other was based on the range. The average total variability per subject was 2.8 decibels (db) using the variance-based calculation and 5.1 db using the range-based calculation. Ninety-five percent of the test locations had a variability of less than 6 db by the variance-based calculation method and 13 db by the range-based calculation method. We discuss the possibility of using this type of data to develop criteria for detection of progressive visual field loss in glaucoma.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2732022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci        ISSN: 0146-0404            Impact factor:   4.799


  17 in total

1.  Normal visual field test results following glaucomatous visual field end points in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study.

Authors:  John L Keltner; Chris A Johnson; Richard A Levine; Juanjuan Fan; Kimberly E Cello; Michael A Kass; Mae O Gordon
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2005-09

2.  Clinical evaluation of the optic nerve in glaucoma.

Authors:  J Caprioli
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  1994

3.  Glaucoma Progression Analysis software compared with expert consensus opinion in the detection of visual field progression in glaucoma.

Authors:  Angelo P Tanna; Donald L Budenz; Jagadeesh Bandi; William J Feuer; Robert M Feldman; Leon W Herndon; Douglas J Rhee; Julia Whiteside-de Vos; Joyce Huang; Douglas R Anderson
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2011-12-02       Impact factor: 12.079

4.  Reducing Variability of Perimetric Global Indices from Eyes with Progressive Glaucoma by Censoring Unreliable Sensitivity Data.

Authors:  Manoj Pathak; Shaban Demirel; Stuart K Gardiner
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2017-07-20       Impact factor: 3.283

5.  Relationships of retinal structure and humphrey 24-2 visual field thresholds in patients with glaucoma.

Authors:  Hrvoje Bogunović; Young H Kwon; Adnan Rashid; Kyungmoo Lee; Douglas B Critser; Mona K Garvin; Milan Sonka; Michael D Abràmoff
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 4.799

6.  Glaucoma detection and evaluation through pattern recognition in standard automated perimetry data.

Authors:  Dariusz Wroblewski; Brian A Francis; Vikas Chopra; A Shahem Kawji; Peter Quiros; Laurie Dustin; R Kemp Massengill
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-07-05       Impact factor: 3.117

7.  A method to detect progression of glaucoma using the multifocal visual evoked potential technique.

Authors:  Boonchai Wangsupadilok; Vivienne C Greenstein; Fabio N Kanadani; Tomas M Grippo; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Robert Ritch; Donald C Hood
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-09-25       Impact factor: 2.379

8.  The Effect of Stimulus Size on the Reliable Stimulus Range of Perimetry.

Authors:  Stuart K Gardiner; Shaban Demirel; Deborah Goren; Steven L Mansberger; William H Swanson
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 3.283

9.  Choice of Stimulus Range and Size Can Reduce Test-Retest Variability in Glaucomatous Visual Field Defects.

Authors:  William H Swanson; Douglas G Horner; Mitchell W Dul; Victor E Malinovsky
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2014-09-25       Impact factor: 3.283

10.  c.194 A>C (Q65P) mutation in the LMX1B gene in patients with nail-patella syndrome associated with glaucoma.

Authors:  Pablo Romero; Felipe Sanhueza; Pamela Lopez; Loreto Reyes; Luisa Herrera
Journal:  Mol Vis       Date:  2011-07-16       Impact factor: 2.367

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.