Purchase this article with an account.
LT Tong, MM Lai, SP Azen, R Varma; Screening for glaucoma and other ocular disease using SITA standard and full threshold Humphrey visual field tests: The Los Angeles Latino Eye Study (LALES) . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2002;43(13):2177.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
Purpose: To compare the sensitivity and specificity of the Swedish interactive threshold algorithm (SITA) strategy with the standard full threshold strategy in a population-based sample. Method: One hundred adults (age ≷40) from the LALES - a population-based study of Latinos - performed both the SITA standard test (C 24) and the full threshold test (C 24-2) using the Humphrey Visual field analyzer. Visual field test results were then compared to the clinical diagnoses of glaucoma and ocular disease as determined by a glaucoma specialist. Results: The differences in mean deviation and test duration (minutes) of the SITA standard compared to the full threshold were statistically significant; mean difference (± SD) = 0.371 ± 0.151 (p<0.016) and -5.37 ± 0.137 (p<0.0001), respectively. For glaucoma cases, the sensitivity and specificity for SITA standard were 100% and 45.1%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity for the full threshold were 88.9% and 60.5%, respectively. For determining all eye diseases, the SITA standard was 100% sensitive and 55.4% specific; the full threshold was 80.8% sensitive and 68.9% specific. Conclusion: The SITA standard was more sensitive for glaucoma cases and all ocular diseases than the full threshold. Therefore, in a screening program, the SITA standard may be a better screening test than the full threshold visual field test.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only