Analysis of Reliability Indices from Humphrey Visual Field Tests in an Urban Glaucoma Population

Birt, Catherine M.; Shin, Dong Ho; Samudrala, Vara; Hughes, Brett A.; Kim, Chaesik; Lee, Damho

doi:10.1016/s0161-6420(97)30173-0

Cited by 107 publications

(98 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar findings are found in the literature, in which age was a significant factor for fixation loss and therefore for unreliability of Humphrey visual field testing. 33 Rohrschneider et al 34 also found a decrease of fixation stability with increasing age, even in normal subjects, evaluating SLO. In contrast, Kosnik et al 35 described no age-dependent difference of fixation stability measured by a Scientific Research International Mark IV dual Purkinje image eye tracker.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Interexaminer and intraexaminer reliability of the microperimeter MP-1

Weingessel

Sacu

Vécsei-Marlovits

et al. 2008

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To evaluate the interexaminer and intraexaminer reliability of macular microperimetry using the microperimeter MP-1. Methods Participants: Fifteen healthy volunteers younger than 40 years of age (Group 1), 15 healthy subjects over 60 years (Group 2), and five patients with age-related macular degeneration (Group 3). Observation procedure: Two examiners (E1 and E2) measured, in random order, interexaminer (E2-E1a) reliability. Another examination was undergone by one of the examiners a week later to evaluate the intraexaminer (E1b-E1a) reliability. Main outcome measures: Macular sensitivity (mean threshold (decibel)) and stability of fixation were determined using MP1 microperimetry. Agreement was analysed by means of Bland-Altman plots and by the determination of the intraclass correlation coefficient. Results The interexaminer (E2-E1a) and the intraexaminer (E1b-E1a) differences in the mean threshold values were not statistically significant (P ¼ 0.850, 95% confidence Interval (CI) ¼ À0.265 to 0.319; P ¼ 0.246, 95% CI ¼ À0.099 to 0.375, respectively). Limits of agreement and intraclass correlation coefficients also showed good agreement in each group. Conclusions A good reliability was found for the mean threshold values in all the three groups, indicating examiner-independent measurements.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Interexaminer and intraexaminer reliability of the microperimeter MP-1

Weingessel

Sacu

Vécsei-Marlovits

et al. 2008

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, methodological differences between Johnson's original data from the prior decade may help explain the varied results 30 . Other reports indicate that patients with visual field defects on SAP demonstrate dramatically larger defects when tested with SWAP [31][32][33] . As data is continually being collected regarding SWAP testing in glaucoma patients, a better understanding of the protocol's benefits and limitations will help elucidate the role of SWAP testing in functional assessment of the glaucoma patient.…”

Section: Short Wavelength Automated Perimetry (Swap) -Blue-on-yellow mentioning

confidence: 96%

“…In clinical practice, many patients are not able to adequately perform the testing regardless of algorithm, and alternate means of documenting functional progression are necessary. Birt, et al, 33 demonstrated in a review of 768 visual field test from 106 glaucoma patients, that only 59.5% of test were considered reliable by the aforementioned criterion. Elevating the fixation loss threshold criterion from 20% to 33% increased the number of fields meeting reliability standards to over 75%.…”

Section: Reliability Indicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of Glaucoma in the Era of Modern Imaging and Diagnostics

Shrivastava¹,

Mian²

2011

Glaucoma - Basic and Clinical Concepts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…[11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] Some studies compared tests for evaluating the VF based on other stimuli than white-on-white perimetry, [21][22][23][24][25][26][27] or evaluated the structure-function relationship. [28][29][30][31][32][33] The objective of the present study was to evaluate and compare the glaucoma diagnostic accuracy of the most widely used VF testing algorithms in clinical practice (24-2 SITA Standard strategy of HFA and G1 TOP strategy of Octopus) with one of the most advanced structural imagining tests (OCT).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic ability of Humphrey perimetry, Octopus perimetry, and optical coherence tomography for glaucomatous optic neuropathy

Monsalve

Ferreras

Calvo

et al. 2016

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA), Octopus perimetry, and Cirrus OCT for glaucomatous optic neuropathy. Methods Eighty-eight healthy individuals and 150 open-angle glaucoma patients were consecutive and prospectively selected. Eligibility criteria for the glaucoma group were intraocular pressure ≥ 21 mm Hg and glaucomatous optic nerve head morphology. All subjects underwent a reliable standard automated perimetry with the HFA and Octopus perimeter, and were imaged with the Cirrus OCT. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted for the threshold values and main indices of the HFA and Octopus, the peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer thicknesses, and the optic nerve head parameters. Sensitivities at 85 and 95% fixedspecificities were also calculated. The best areas under the ROC curves (AUCs) were compared using the DeLong method. Results In the glaucoma group, mean deviation (MD) was − 5.42 ± 4.6 dB for HFA and 3.90 ± 3.6 dB for Octopus. The MD of the HFA (0.966; Po0.001), mean sensitivity of the Octopus (0.941; Po0.001), and average cup-todisc (C/D) ratio measured by the Cirrus OCT (0.958; Po0.001) had the largest AUCs for each test studied. There were no significant differences among them. Sensitivities at 95% fixed-specificity were 82% for pattern standard deviation of the HFA, 81.3% for average C/D ratio of OCT, and 80% for the MD of the Octopus. Conclusions HFA, Octopus, and Cirrus OCT demonstrated similar diagnostic accuracies for glaucomatous optic neuropathy. Visual field and OCT provide supplementary information and thus these tests are not interchangeable.

show abstract

Analysis of Reliability Indices from Humphrey Visual Field Tests in an Urban Glaucoma Population

Cited by 107 publications

References 9 publications

Interexaminer and intraexaminer reliability of the microperimeter MP-1

Interexaminer and intraexaminer reliability of the microperimeter MP-1

Management of Glaucoma in the Era of Modern Imaging and Diagnostics

Diagnostic ability of Humphrey perimetry, Octopus perimetry, and optical coherence tomography for glaucomatous optic neuropathy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About