RT Journal Article
A1 Rossetti, Luca
A1 Fogagnolo, Paolo
A1 Digiuni, Maurizio
A1 Modarelli, Antonio
A1 Montesano, Giovanni
T1 Comparison of two strategies to calculate perimetric sensitivity with the Compass perimeter.
JF Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science
JO Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.
YR 2016
VO 57
IS 12
SP 3933
OP 3933
SN 1552-5783
AB    To compare ZEST (Zippy Estimation by Sequential Testing) vs 4-2 strategies for Compass Fundus Automated Perimetry (FAP, CenterVue, Padova, Italy).    18 helthy subjects and 15 glaucoma patients were enrolled. They received 3 perimetric tests with the two strategies on one eye chosen at random using FAP. The following test order was used: 4-2, ZEST, 4- 2.    The difference in mean sensitivity (4-2 vs ZEST) was -0.9 dB. Test duration with ZEST was 353 ± 31 sec on healthy subjects (6.4 sec/location) and 343 ± 67 sec on glaucoma patients (6.2 sec/location).    Mean sensitivity with ZEST is comparable with 4-2, being about 1 dB higher. A similar finding is found in the literature between full-threshold and SITA programs with Humphrey. Mean duration with ZEST is nearly halved compared with previously published data on FAP 4-2. These preliminary data suggest that ZEST strategy can improve FAP clinical use.  This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2016 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, Wash., May 1-5, 2016. 
RD 3/7/2021