Purchase this article with an account.
J.D. Bartlett, A. Shaikh, L. Semes, A. Xie; Comparison of Humphrey Matrix 24–2 Standard Perimetry and Humphrey Field Analyzer 24–2 SITA Standard Perimetry . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2005;46(13):2484.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
Purpose: To compare results from Humphrey® Field Analyzer (HFA) 24–2 SITA–standard with results from Humphrey® Matrix 24–2 standard in normal subjects. Methods: One hundred sixty–six eyes of 83 subjects were screened for the study, and 88 eyes of 44 subjects were evaluated. HFA was performed at the first visit. Subjects returned in four weeks to have Matrix performed. Results: The average mean deviation (MD) for HFA was –2.51 ± 1.8 and for Matrix was –1.81 ± 3.5 (p = 0.3197). The average pattern standard deviation (PSD) was 1.74 ± 0.8 and 2.85 ± 0.8 (p < 0.0001), and on the pattern deviation significance (PDS) plot, the average number of points at the <5% probability level was 2.73 ± 2.2 and 2.07± 2.1 (p = 0.0310) for the HFA and Matrix, respectively. The mean deviation (MD), the average number of points at the <2%, <1%, and <0.5% probability level, percent fixation losses (%FL), percent false positives (%FP), percent false negatives (%FN), and time of test were not significantly different between the two devices. The agreement measurement for the Glaucoma Hemifield Test (GHT) for HFA and Matrix was 0.28. Conclusions: The Matrix measured a significantly higher PSD, but significantly fewer <5% probability points. There was also poor correlation between the two instruments on the GHT. The two instruments use a different type of target to measure the threshold visual field, so one cannot compare directly the results from the two instruments.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only