June 2017
Volume 58, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2017
Comparison of Threshold Visual Field Results Using Translucent and Opaque Occlusion
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Thomas Callan
    R&D, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., Dublin, California, United States
  • Carmen Yoo
    R&D, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., Dublin, California, United States
  • Sophia Yu
    R&D, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., Dublin, California, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Thomas Callan, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc. (E); Carmen Yoo, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc. (C); Sophia Yu, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc. (E)
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2017, Vol.58, 2840. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to Subscribers Only
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Thomas Callan, Carmen Yoo, Sophia Yu; Comparison of Threshold Visual Field Results Using Translucent and Opaque Occlusion. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2017;58(8):2840.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Many claim that use of a translucent occluder for visual fields is a better method for testing than using an opaque occluder. Patients are said to be more comfortable with translucent occlusion and may be more sensitive in their testing results (Fuhr, 1990). The purpose of this study was to investigate whether visual field results are significantly different when using a white (W) translucent eye patch compared to a black (B) opaque eye patch for occlusion of the non-tested eye under standard testing conditions.

Methods : Volunteers with no known ophthalmic diseases were recruited and both eyes were tested with the Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA) Standard 24-2 test using an opaque (black) eye patch and a translucent (white) eye patch on the HFA3 (Humphrey Field Analyzer) Model 860 (ZEISS, Dublin, CA). Testing was randomized for eye dominance and color of the eye patch between subjects. The subjects ran two pairs of visual field tests for a total of four tests on the same day with a minimum of 45 minutes between testing sessions. Patient comfort was surveyed and results tabulated.

Results : Ten normal subjects (mean age 46.5; range 31 – 63 years) were studied. In this cohort of subjects, the mean deviation (MD) was slightly better with the translucent eye patch (W: -0.191 dB, B: -0.365 dB) with a small mean difference of - 0.174 dB. The difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.616). Similar small differences for Pattern Standard Deviation (PSD) and Visual Field Index (VFI) were determined to not be statistically significant as well (see Table 1). Subjects were surveyed as to whether they had a preference for the translucent or opaque occluder. Eight out of the ten subjects either “greatly” or “somewhat” preferred the translucent (white) eye patch.

Conclusions : There is no statistically significant difference in MD, PSD or VFI results between the use of an opaque occluder or the use of a translucent occluder when performing standard SITA threshold visual fields. Patients reported being more comfortable when being tested with the translucent occluder. These findings using the 24-2 SITA Standard threshold test under normal testing conditions are consistent with the findings of Fuhr.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2017 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Baltimore, MD, May 7-11, 2017.

 

Table 1: Two-Sample T-Test and CI for MD, PSD and VFI (Black, White)

Table 1: Two-Sample T-Test and CI for MD, PSD and VFI (Black, White)

×
×

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.

×