Literature DB >> 4028922

Should visual field examination be a routine part of ophthalmic practice?

I F Gutteridge.   

Abstract

Visual field screening conducted on indication was compared with routine visual field screening to determine the effectiveness of these strategies in identifying patients with normal and abnormal visual fields. The sample consisted of 1,500 consecutively presenting patients. Each patient was screened with the Friedmann Visual Field Analyser Mark II. Visual field defects were detected in 3.0% of eyes. Routine visual field screening detected a very high proportion of these defects. The two indications approaches which were tested achieved only slightly lower sensitivities and specificities, while necessitating that only approximately 20% of patients required screening. The most effective strategy for screening on indication was based on overall clinical assessment of each case, although the optimal criteria relied on low levels of suspicion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1985        PMID: 4028922     DOI: 10.1007/bf00159167

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0012-4486            Impact factor:   2.379


  12 in total

1.  Static perimetry.

Authors:  E L Greve
Journal:  Ophthalmologica       Date:  1975       Impact factor: 3.250

2.  Evaluation of the Friedmann Visual Field Analyser.

Authors:  F Feldman
Journal:  Can J Ophthalmol       Date:  1975-07       Impact factor: 1.882

3.  The screening of the central visual field.

Authors:  G K Krieglstein; K Andrae
Journal:  Albrecht Von Graefes Arch Klin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1975

4.  Mass visual field investigation in 1834 persons with supposedly normal eyes.

Authors:  E L Greve; W M Verduin
Journal:  Albrecht Von Graefes Arch Klin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1972

5.  The early field defects in glaucoma.

Authors:  S M Drance
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol       Date:  1969-02

6.  The working threshold approach to Friedmann visual field analyser screening.

Authors:  I F Gutteridge
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 3.117

7.  Screening for visual field abnormalities with automated perimetry.

Authors:  J L Keltner; C A Johnson
Journal:  Surv Ophthalmol       Date:  1983 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 6.048

8.  Perimetry update.

Authors:  W Leydhecker
Journal:  Ann Ophthalmol       Date:  1983-06

9.  Automatic perimetry in a population survey.

Authors:  B Bengtsson; C E Krakau
Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh)       Date:  1979-10

10.  Incidence of visual field loss in 20,000 eyes and its relationship to driving performance.

Authors:  C A Johnson; J L Keltner
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  1983-03
View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  The value of visual field testing in the era of advanced imaging: clinical and psychophysical perspectives.

Authors:  Jack Phu; Sieu K Khuu; Michael Yapp; Nagi Assaad; Michael P Hennessy; Michael Kalloniatis
Journal:  Clin Exp Optom       Date:  2017-06-22       Impact factor: 2.742

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.