Purchase this article with an account.
John M. Wild, Ian E. Pacey, Eamon C. O’Neill, Ian A. Cunliffe; The SITA Perimetric Threshold Algorithms in Glaucoma. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 1999;40(9):1998-2009. doi: https://doi.org/.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
purpose. To determine the within-visit between-algorithm and the
within-algorithm between-visit differences in sensitivity for the SITA
Standard, SITA Fast, FASTPAC, and Full Threshold algorithms in stable
primary open angle glaucoma.
methods. One designated eye from each of 29 patients (age 67.3 ± 10.2
years; mean ± SD) experienced in automated perimetry was examined
with the four algorithms on each of three visits, using the Humphrey
Field Analyzer 750 and Program 30-2.
results. The group mean Mean Sensitivity was 1.0 dB greater for SITA Standard
than Full Threshold (P < 0.001), 0.7 dB greater for SITA
Standard than FASTPAC (P < 0.001), 1.6 dB greater
for SITA Fast than FASTPAC (P < 0.001), and 0.9 dB
greater for SITA Fast than SITA Standard (P <
0.001). The higher pointwise sensitivity for SITA Fast compared to Full
Threshold, FASTPAC, and SITA Standard increased with increase in defect
depth. The examination duration for SITA Standard was 53% of that for
Full Threshold and 50% shorter for SITA Fast compared to FASTPAC
(P < 0.001), regardless of age
(P = 0.932). The examination duration increased
with increase in severity of field loss (P <
0.001), and this increase was proportionately greater for both SITA
algorithms (P < 0.001), particularly SITA Fast.
The Total and Pattern Deviation probability analyses of both SITA
algorithms yielded a statistically greater defect than Full Threshold
or FASTPAC (P < 0.001). The within-algorithm
between-visit differences were similar between SITA Standard and Full
Threshold and between SITA Fast and FASTPAC.
conclusions. Both SITA algorithms produce a marginally higher differential light
sensitivity compared to existing algorithms but with a statistically
deeper defect and a marked reduction in examination
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only