PURPOSE: High-pass resolution perimeters such as the Ophthimus (High Tech Vision, Malmö, Sweden) may provide an easier, faster assessment of the visual field than conventional perimeters such as the Humphrey (Humphrey Instruments Inc., San Leandro, CA, U.S.A.), which is based on differential light sensitivity. The Ophthimus provides global indices and statistical analyses conceptually similar to those produced by the Humphrey. In addition, the Ophthimus provides, as a unique parameter, the estimated neural capacity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-one patients with chronic open-angle glaucoma and reliable fields on both Humphrey and Ophthimus testing were evaluated. The results from the two different techniques were compared. RESULTS: The estimated neural capacity was correlated to global deviation and mean deviation at a statistically significant level. There were also correlations between mean deviation and global deviation and between pattern standard deviation and local deviation, but not between retest standard deviation and short-term fluctuation. CONCLUSION: It is not clear at this point if the neural capacity of the Ophthimus provides any clinically useful information over and above global deviation. Mean test time was shorter with the Ophthimus system than the Humphrey. Performance on the reliability indices was better for the Ophthimus. The Ophthimus may prove useful in following patients with glaucoma.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: High-pass resolution perimeters such as the Ophthimus (High Tech Vision, Malmö, Sweden) may provide an easier, faster assessment of the visual field than conventional perimeters such as the Humphrey (Humphrey Instruments Inc., San Leandro, CA, U.S.A.), which is based on differential light sensitivity. The Ophthimus provides global indices and statistical analyses conceptually similar to those produced by the Humphrey. In addition, the Ophthimus provides, as a unique parameter, the estimated neural capacity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-one patients with chronic open-angle glaucoma and reliable fields on both Humphrey and Ophthimus testing were evaluated. The results from the two different techniques were compared. RESULTS: The estimated neural capacity was correlated to global deviation and mean deviation at a statistically significant level. There were also correlations between mean deviation and global deviation and between pattern standard deviation and local deviation, but not between retest standard deviation and short-term fluctuation. CONCLUSION: It is not clear at this point if the neural capacity of the Ophthimus provides any clinically useful information over and above global deviation. Mean test time was shorter with the Ophthimus system than the Humphrey. Performance on the reliability indices was better for the Ophthimus. The Ophthimus may prove useful in following patients with glaucoma.