Literature DB >> 3717255

The effect of refractive correction on automated perimetric thresholds.

R N Weinreb, J P Perlman.   

Abstract

We determined the effect of introducing errors in refractive correction on the threshold retinal sensitivity in the central 6 degrees of the visual field in 11 normal subjects using automated static perimetry (Octopus program 62). A summated value of threshold retinal sensitivity was computed for each visual field by taking the sum of all 21 measured points in units of decibels. In 21 of 22 tested eyes, the emmetropic condition was associated with the highest summated retinal sensitivity. Summated retinal sensitivity decreased with increasing plus spherical (+1.00 and +2.00 diopters) power in 21 of 22 eyes. Threshold retinal sensitivity decreased -0.377 dB/degree for each degree away from fixation (P less than .0001). These slopes did not appear to depend on the refractive error (P = .77). Thus, even small refractive errors can artifactitiously decrease threshold retinal sensitivity within the central 6 degrees of the visual field.

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3717255     DOI: 10.1016/0002-9394(86)90774-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0002-9394            Impact factor:   5.258


  11 in total

1.  Light-sense, flicker and resolution perimetry in glaucoma: a comparative study.

Authors:  B J Lachenmayr; S M Drance; G R Douglas; F S Mikelberg
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  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

3.  Interpreting the multifocal visual evoked potential: the effects of refractive errors, cataracts, and fixation errors.

Authors:  B J Winn; E Shin; J G Odel; V C Greenstein; D C Hood
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 4.638

4.  Effect of refractive errors on multifocal VEP responses and standard automated perimetry tests in a single population.

Authors:  Makoto Nakamura; Kei Kato; Seiko Kamata; Kumiko Ishikawa; Takayuki Nagai
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-03-11       Impact factor: 2.379

Review 5.  Automated perimetry in glaucoma--room for improvement?

Authors:  C O'Brien; J M Wild
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 4.638

6.  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

7.  Effects of mydriasis and miosis on kinetic perimetry findings in normal participants.

Authors:  Kazunori Hirasawa; Nobuyuki Shoji; Chieko Kobashi; Ayaka Yamanashi
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-05-19       Impact factor: 3.117

8.  Blur-resistant perimetric stimuli.

Authors:  Douglas G Horner; Mitchell W Dul; William H Swanson; Tiffany Liu; Irene Tran
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 1.973

9.  Diffuse and localized glaucomatous field loss in light-sense, flicker and resolution perimetry.

Authors:  B J Lachenmayr; S M Drance; B C Chauhan; P H House; S Lalani
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 3.117

10.  Optimizing contrast sensitivity perimetry for clinical use.

Authors:  Mitchell W Dul
Journal:  J Ophthalmic Vis Res       Date:  2013-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.