December 1996
Volume 37, Issue 13
Free
Articles  |   December 1996
Comparison of psychophysical and electrophysiological testing in early glaucoma.
Author Affiliations
  • S L Graham
    University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
  • S M Drance
    University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
  • B C Chauhan
    University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
  • N V Swindale
    University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
  • P Hnik
    University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
  • F S Mikelberg
    University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
  • G R Douglas
    University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science December 1996, Vol.37, 2651-2662. doi:
  • Views
  • PDF
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      S L Graham, S M Drance, B C Chauhan, N V Swindale, P Hnik, F S Mikelberg, G R Douglas; Comparison of psychophysical and electrophysiological testing in early glaucoma.. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 1996;37(13):2651-2662.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the sensitivity and specificity of a wide range of psychophysical and electrophysiological tests in the detection of early glaucomatous damage. METHODS: Forty-three normals and 43 patients with early glaucoma, some still without field defects, were tested with differential light threshold perimetry, short-wavelength automated perimetry, high-pass resolution perimetry, motion detection, flicker contrast sensitivity, flickering and isoluminantly matched letter tests, and pattern and flash electroretinography, including photopic, scotopic, oscillatory potentials, and 30 Hz flicker. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was applied to continuous variables derived from each of the tests. RESULTS: Most parameters reflected glaucomatous loss to some degree, even though only single variables were analyzed separately in the receiver operating characteristic analysis. The pattern electroretinogram and some of the letter acuity tests had the best sensitivity and specificity, followed by short-wavelength automated perimetry and high-pass resolution-perimetry. Motion detection, flicker contrast, and flash electroretinogram parameters scored poorly. Six patients with normal results on the Humphrey field test had abnormal results on many of the other tests. CONCLUSIONS: Applying different psychophysical and electrophysiological tests may add to our ability to detect early glaucomatous damage.

×
×

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.

×