June 2013
Volume 54, Issue 15
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2013
The Effect of the Automated Visual Field Examination on Intraocular Pressure (IOP) in Patients with Glaucoma
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Sonya Makhni
    Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY
  • Dipali Dave
    Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY
  • Matthew Karl
    SUNY Downstate College of Medicine, Brooklyn, NY
  • Janet Serle
    Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships Sonya Makhni, None; Dipali Dave, None; Matthew Karl, None; Janet Serle, Acorn (F), Aerie (F), Forest Research Institute (C), Ono (C), Sucampo (C), Fovea (F)
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2013, Vol.54, 5645. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Sonya Makhni, Dipali Dave, Matthew Karl, Janet Serle; The Effect of the Automated Visual Field Examination on Intraocular Pressure (IOP) in Patients with Glaucoma. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2013;54(15):5645.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of the automated visual field examination on the intraocular pressure (IOP) in glaucoma suspects and glaucoma patients.

Methods: An ongoing prospective study has enrolled 40 patients (80 eyes) with mean age of 64 ± 13.5 years. Enrollment criteria included glaucoma or glaucoma suspects, clinical monitoring for >1 month, and no change in clinical management from previous month. Patients underwent Humphrey Visual Field (HVF) SITA 24-2 examination as part of routine care. Goldmann applanation tonometry was performed 1 hour prior to the HVF, and 15 minutes and 1 hour following completion of the field (referred to as IOP1, IOP2, and IOP3). Univariant chi-square analysis was conducted to evaluate for statistical significance of IOP changes.

Results: Patients (40 patients, 80 eyes) were (mean ± SD) 64 ± 13.5 years of age, on 2.5 ± 1.6 prescribed glaucoma medications, and had a mean visual field index (VFI) of 8 6 ± 17.7 on HVF testing; 22 patients had undergone at least one surgical and/or laser glaucoma treatment in the past. Mean IOP1, IOP2, and IOP3 were found to be constant across all time points for both eyes, at 13.5 ± 0.02, 13.4 ± 0.22, and 13.4 ± 0.39 mmHg, respectively. The mean change in IOP from IOP1 to IOP2 was: -0.12 ± 2.8 mmHg, from IOP2 to IOP 3: 0.00 ± 1.9 mmHg, and from IOP 2 to IOP 3: 0.00 ± 2.3 mmHg. Increases in intraocular pressure of >2 mm Hg (4.2 ± 1.2 mmHg) from IOP1 to IOP2 were noted in 23% of patients (9 patients, 10 eyes). Of these eyes, 7 showed reductions of greater than 2 mmHg from IOP 1 to IOP3. Age, gender, number of medications, severity of glaucoma, as well as number and type of surgical procedures previously performed did not result in any significant effects on IOP.

Conclusions: In this patient population, most of whom had mild glaucoma, no significant changes in eye pressure following the HVF were found. IOP can be measured soon after performing visual field testing, as is the common practice.

Keywords: 568 intraocular pressure • 758 visual fields  
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×