Literature DB >> 8479710

Priority of test locations for automated perimetry in glaucoma.

T G Zeyen1, M Zulauf, J Caprioli.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Static threshold automated perimetry is a demanding test which can be tiring for some patients. The authors investigate how to optimize early stages of the test which can shorten examination time and improve performance. The effectiveness of measuring every point twice to improve diagnostic precision (proportion of eyes correctly diagnosed as normal or glaucomatous) also was evaluated.
METHODS: The authors evaluated the relative contributions of individual test locations to the sensitivity and specificity of static threshold perimetry. One hundred visual fields (Octopus Program G1) of 100 patients with open-angle glaucoma and early glaucomatous defects were used to rank the most frequently defective test locations. This sequence was modified so that highly correlated points were not ranked together. The sensitivities and specificities of the defined sequence of test presentations were then measured in a separate database of 70 normal controls and 70 patients with early glaucomatous visual field defects.
RESULTS: Sensitivity and specificity were, respectively, 80% and 80% after 12 locations, 89% and 89% after 26 locations, and 97% and 99% after all 59 test locations. The information obtained with the first phase alone approximates that of both phases.
CONCLUSION: Staging of locations tested with automated perimetry in glaucoma may be a valuable method to reduce examination time, minimize fatigue effects, and optimize diagnostic information. Retesting every point does not improve diagnostic precision.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8479710     DOI: 10.1016/s0161-6420(93)31612-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmology        ISSN: 0161-6420            Impact factor:   12.079


  8 in total

1.  Evaluation of Visual Field and Imaging Outcomes for Glaucoma Clinical Trials (An American Ophthalomological Society Thesis).

Authors:  David F Garway-Heath; Ana Quartilho; Philip Prah; David P Crabb; Qian Cheng; Haogang Zhu
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  2017-08-22

2.  Predicting progressive glaucomatous optic neuropathy using baseline standard automated perimetry data.

Authors:  Shaban Demirel; Brad Fortune; Juanjuan Fan; Richard A Levine; Rodrigo Torres; Hau Nguyen; Steven L Mansberger; Stuart K Gardiner; George A Cioffi; Chris A Johnson
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2008-10-20       Impact factor: 4.799

3.  Investigating the Influence of Visual Function and Systemic Risk Factors on Falls and Injurious Falls in Glaucoma Using the Structural Equation Modeling.

Authors:  Kenya Yuki; Ryo Asaoka; Kazuo Tsubota
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-08       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Mapping glaucoma patients' 30-2 and 10-2 visual fields reveals clusters of test points damaged in the 10-2 grid that are not sampled in the sparse 30-2 grid.

Authors:  Ryo Asaoka
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-06-20       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  The relationship between central visual field damage and motor vehicle collisions in primary open-angle glaucoma patients.

Authors:  Kenya Yuki; Ryo Asaoka; Kazuo Tsubota
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-12-29       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Identifying areas of the visual field important for quality of life in patients with glaucoma.

Authors:  Hiroshi Murata; Hiroyo Hirasawa; Yuka Aoyama; Kenji Sugisaki; Makoto Araie; Chihiro Mayama; Makoto Aihara; Ryo Asaoka
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-03-08       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Development of Visual Field Screening Procedures: A Case Study of the Octopus Perimeter.

Authors:  Andrew Turpin; Jonathan S Myers; Allison M McKendrick
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2016-05-09       Impact factor: 3.283

8.  Impact of better and worse eye damage on quality of life in advanced glaucoma.

Authors:  Mizu Okamoto; Kenji Sugisaki; Hiroshi Murata; Hiroyo Hirasawa; Chihiro Mayama; Ryo Asaoka
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2014-02-20       Impact factor: 4.379

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.