Does Saving Time Using FASTPAC or Suprathreshold Testing Reduce Quality of Visual Fields?

Clinical evaluation of SITA: a new family of perimetric testing strategies

“…It may be explained by lessened intra-test fatigue due to the reduced test time for SITA, since a decrease in sensitivity with increased test duration has been reported in normal and glaucoma patients [8,16]. FAST-PAC, for example, which can perform threshold determination with shorter duration of testing time than Full Threshold, has demonstrated a lower mean deviation of 0.9±1.2 dB [3,4,13] or a higher mean threshold of 0.3 dB [12]. In the crossover studies comparing FASTPAC and Full Threshold, the higher sensitivity with FASTPAC than with Full Threshold was significant when FASTPAC was performed first on the same day [3,13].…”

“…The test-retest variability studied in normal subjects was slightly, but not significantly, lower with SITA (2.9%) than with Full Threshold (3.4%). Bengtsson et al [1,2] have reported a 50% time saving with SITA [3,9,12,13,15], SITA could be better in time saving for threshold determination throughout the visual field and may be better in test-retest variability than FASTPAC. Additionally, in the present study, it was shown that cases requiring longer testing time for Full Threshold had a larger reduction in testing time for SITA.…”

“…These results indicate that the higher sensitivity of SITA in the present study may be due to lessened fatigue resulting from reduced testing duration, as with FASTPAC. Even though the difference in thresholds between FASTPAC and Full Threshold may be caused not only by fatigue but also by the difference in staircase bracketing logic between them (FASTPAC: 3 dB step; Full Threshold: 4-2 dB step) [4,5,12], the differences in sensitivity between SITA and Full Threshold in the present study cannot be explained by the bracketing logic, since SITA is performed by 4-2 dB step, the same as Full Threshold [1,2]. Glass et al, in simulations for FASTPAC and Full Threshold using an artificial patient module, showed that the starting deviation (difference between starting stimulus value and actual threshold) affects the threshold error (difference between estimated threshold and actual threshold), and negative starting deviation leads to negative threshold errors and vice versa in both tests [5].…”

Clinical Trial of Lutein in Patients With Retinitis Pigmentosa Receiving Vitamin A

“…The FASTPAC test strategy was used to test both central (30-2) and mid-peripheral (60-4) visual fields in as short a time as possible. 30-32…”

Is visual field evaluation using multiple correlations and linear regressions useful? An evaluation of Delphi perimetry

“…Another strategy using alteration of the staircase threshold is`Fastpac', which presents the stimuli in 3-dB steps and uses a single threshold crossing, thus reducing the examination time and patient fatigue [2,15]. Several studies have confirmed the benefit of the Fastpac strategy in reducing test time without a significant deterioration in defect detection [6,15,17,18].…”