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

Purpose The G1-TOP program is a short automated perimetric strategy which sub-divides the G1 grid of 59 points into four sub-grids. Each point is tested only once, but each patient's response is used to modify that particular point and the surrounding ones from the remaining sub-grids. This study compared the results of the G1-TOP program with the Standard Bracketing strategy. Methods Eleven participating institutions provided data from 213 patients (406 eyes). The main group consisted of 284 glaucomas and 55 glaucoma suspects. Other groups included 31 eyes with neurological disorders, 20 with chorioretinal lesions and 16 normal eyes. Mean age was 62.7 ± 15.4 (range 14–88) years. All subjects had previous perimetric experience and visual acuity better than 0.5. Examination included G1-Standard Bracketing and G1-TOP testing, in interchangeable order, with the Octopus 1-2-3 perimeter. Results The correlation coefficient for mean defect (MD) was 0.95. Standard error (YX) for MD, square root of loss variance (LV) and individual thresholds were 1.86 dB, 1.29 dB, and 4.72 dB, respectively. Mean sensitivity values were similar (difference 0.04 ± 1.87 dB) (p>0.05). Mean duration for G1-TOP was 2.19 ± 0.26 min, while G1-Standard Bracketing took 11.51 ± 1.52 min (ratio 1/5.1, or a net reduction of 80.4%). The sensitivity of G1-TOP versus G1-Standard Bracketing was: glaucoma 77.1/78.5, glaucoma suspects 38.2/47.3, neurological disorders 87.1/87.1 and chorioretinal lesions 80.0/85.0. Conclusions The G1-TOP program gave very similar results to G1-Standard Bracketing in only 20% of the time required by the standard strategy.

show abstract

Multicenter Evaluation of Tendency-Oriented Perimetry (TOP) Using the G1 Grid

Rosa

Morales

Dannheim

et al. 2003

European Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

hi@scite.ai

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

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

Abstract: In this study Delphi perimetry failed to give an accurate statistical estimation of the visual field in an unacceptably high number of cases; therefore, it cannot be recommended for clinical use.

Cited by 1 publication

References 9 publications

Multicenter Evaluation of Tendency-Oriented Perimetry (TOP) Using the G1 Grid

Multicenter Evaluation of Tendency-Oriented Perimetry (TOP) Using the G1 Grid

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About