Comparison of two fast strategies, SITA Fast and TOP, for the assessment of visual fields in glaucoma patients

King, Anthony J; Taguri, Abdel Hakim; Wadood, Azfar C; Azuara‐Blanco, Augusto

doi:10.1007/s00417-002-0482-y

Cited by 35 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The examination starts at half of the corresponding normal threshold value, and is continued in decreasing steps based on age-corrected normal values in either direction 1 2. The result is a threshold sensitivity value for each location formed by the four closest neighbouring points, each of which belongs to a different grid 1 2 12 16. Threshold determination with the TOP strategy does not respect the cluster borders 2 16.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of structure–function relationship between corresponding retinal nerve fibre layer thickness and Octopus visual field cluster defect values determined by normal and tendency-oriented strategies

Holló

2016

Br J Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Octopus normal and TOP strategies provide similar, moderate-to-strong negative correlation between the corresponding cluster defect and sector RNFLT values for all 10 manufacturer-provided clusters. For corrected clusters the relationship is poor, which suggests that by correcting for diffuse sensitivity loss some local glaucomatous defect is removed. For structure-function based clinical decisions, use of TOP is possible but use of corrected clusters is not recommended.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of structure–function relationship between corresponding retinal nerve fibre layer thickness and Octopus visual field cluster defect values determined by normal and tendency-oriented strategies

Holló

2016

Br J Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Poor reliability was deemed present with fixation losses and false positive and false negative responses of >25% [9]. …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Octopus Semi-Automated Kinetic Perimetry and Humphrey Peripheral Static Perimetry in Neuro-Ophthalmic Cases

Rowe

Noonan

Manuel³

2013

ISRN Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim. To compare semikinetic perimetry (SKP) on Octopus 900 perimetry to a peripheral static programme with Humphrey automated perimetry. Methods. Prospective cross-section study comparing Humphrey full field (FF) 120 two zone programme to a screening protocol for SKP on Octopus perimetry. Results were independently graded for presence/absence of field defect plus type and location of defect. Results. 64 patients (113 eyes) underwent dual perimetry assessment. Mean duration of assessment for SKP was 4.54 minutes ±0.18 and 6.17 ± 0.12 for FF120 (P = 0.0001). 80% of results were correctly matched for normal or abnormal visual fields using the I4e target versus FF120, and 73.5% were correctly matched using the I2e target versus FF120. When comparing Octopus results with combined I4e and I2e isopters to the FF120 result, a match for normal or abnormal fields was recorded in 87%. Conclusions. Humphrey perimetry test duration was generally longer than Octopus SKP. In the absence of kinetic perimetry, peripheral static suprathreshold programme options such as FF120 may be useful for detection of visual field defects. However, statokinetic dissociation may occur. Octopus SKP utilising both I4e and I2e targets provides detailed information of both the defect depth and size and may provide a more representative view of the actual visual field defect.

show abstract

“…The time saving was generally more pronounced in the control group, and less pronounced in the glaucoma group with advanced visual field loss. However, when compared to the fast strategies available on the market, like Dynamic, SITA, and TOP algorithms, the pulsed RAMP is still slower than their average test durations [6][7][8][9]19,20].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison between the Pulsed Rising Amplitude Perimetry and the Normal Staircase Strategy in Standard Automated Perimetry

Todorova¹,

Palmowski-Wolfe²

2013

J Clin Exp Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionStandard automated perimetry (SAP) is the currently accepted gold standard for detection and monitoring of glaucomatous dysfunction [1]. The outcome of SAP as a psychophysical test, however, is subjective and variable [2,3]. In the normal strategy (NS) the stimulus luminance varies stepwise, in order to define thresholds. As published literature clearly demonstrates, in cases with advanced visual field disturbances, increasing the accuracy of the estimated threshold and its reproducibility require prolongation of the examination time. This, in consequence, results in increasing fatigue-related artefacts [2,3], which hinder a direct comparison of local threshold resolution.New fast perimetric strategies, like Dynamic, Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) and Tendency-Oriented Perimetry (TOP) aim at achieving a comparable high sensitivity and specificity for detection of disease and progression analysis, while taking considerably less time. Here, the examination time is decreased using the prior information about age-corrected normal thresholds values, frequency-of-seeing curves (FOS-curves) and correlations between different points, while the results of the already tested neighbouring points are taken into account, as well [4][5][6][7][8][9]. The significant gain in time in the TOP strategy, however, is producing a reduction in spatial resolution, making the test unsuitable for application in pathologies with very narrow, deep defects [8,9].One further attempt in optimising the test duration, while keeping an accurate threshold determination, is the introduction of methods based on continuous luminance variation. The rising amplitude perimetry (RAMP) and its modification -the continuous light increment strategy (CLIP) [10,11], in contrast to the TOP strategy, is assessing every single test location independently. Here, the slow temporal onset algorithm starts from invisible (subthreshold) light and increases in luminance until the patient responds to the light.In general, the determination of thresholds varies complexly and is dependent on several variables, including the effect of temporal summation, stimulus duration, speed of the light onset and wavelength of monochromatic light [12,13].For CLIP methods, the summative phenomenon of the neighboring areas after exposure to light, that is the effect of temporal summation, AbstractBackground and scope: Pulsed rising amplitude perimetry (pulsed RAMP) is an improved strategy for automated static perimetry, developed to save examination time without accuracy loss. The aim of this study was to identify characteristic differences between the normal strategy (NS) and the pulsed RAMP strategy in standard automated perimetry, in order to evaluate the potential of the pulsed RAMP for threshold estimation.

show abstract

Comparison of two fast strategies, SITA Fast and TOP, for the assessment of visual fields in glaucoma patients

Cited by 35 publications

References 18 publications

Comparison of structure–function relationship between corresponding retinal nerve fibre layer thickness and Octopus visual field cluster defect values determined by normal and tendency-oriented strategies

Comparison of structure–function relationship between corresponding retinal nerve fibre layer thickness and Octopus visual field cluster defect values determined by normal and tendency-oriented strategies

Comparison of Octopus Semi-Automated Kinetic Perimetry and Humphrey Peripheral Static Perimetry in Neuro-Ophthalmic Cases

A Comparison between the Pulsed Rising Amplitude Perimetry and the Normal Staircase Strategy in Standard Automated Perimetry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About