Purpose
Repeatability of peripheral visual field testing using Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) program 60-4 influences the ability to detect change of visual field thresholds. Peripheral visual field testing may be useful for applications such as monitoring for certain drug toxicities. This study is aimed to determine if the stimulus size affects the test-retest variability of the peripheral field.
Methods
HFA 60-4 program was performed in 50 healthy volunteers (based on a normal visual acuity, slit lamp and fundus exam on comprehensive ophthalmic evaluation). Subjects were randomized to undergo peripheral visual field testing using stimulus III or stimulus V. Retest was performed within 3 month after initial testing. Only reliable PVF tests were included (fixation loss, false positive and negative <30%). Each of the 60 a measured threshold visual sensitivity (decibels) was labeled with a NTSI (nasal/temporal/superior/inferior) coordinate system. Points were organized into inner, middle, and outer eccentricity rings. Student’s t-test was used to compare test and retest values in a ring orientation previously described.1,2
Results
Higher threshold visual sensitivities were achieved with stimulus V (Table). We found no statistically significant difference between test-retest reliability in any of eccentricity rings using stimulus III or V.
Conclusions
Stimulus III and V gave similar test-retest reliability using HFA 60-4 program in naïve healthy volunteers. 1.Berezina TL, Khouri AS, Kolomeyer AM, Clancy PS, Fechtner RD. Peripheral visual field thresholds using Humphrey Field Analyzer program 60-4 in normal eyes. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2011 Jul-Aug;21(4):415-21 2.Berezina TL, Khouri AS, Winship MD, Fechtner RD. Visual field and ocular safety during short-term vigabatrin treatment in cocaine abusers. Am J Ophthalmol. 2012 Aug;154(2):326-332
Keywords: 758 visual fields •
642 perimetry •
465 clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: systems/equipment/techniques