March 2012
Volume 53, Issue 14
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   March 2012
Detection of Glaucomatous Progression Using Stimulus Size V
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Michael Wall
    Departments of Neurology and Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences, University of Iowa, Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa
    Iowa City VA Health Care System, Iowa City, Iowa
  • Carrie K. Doyle
    Iowa City VA Health Care System, Iowa City, Iowa
    Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences,
    University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
  • Trina L. Eden
    Iowa City VA Health Care System, Iowa City, Iowa
    Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences,
    University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
  • Chris A. Johnson
    Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences and Institute for Vision Research,
    University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa
  • Monella M. Tamegnon
    Department of Biostatistics, University of Iowa College of Public Health, Iowa City, Iowa
  • Gideon J. Zamba
    Department of Biostatistics, University of Iowa College of Public Health, Iowa City, Iowa
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  Michael Wall, None; Carrie K. Doyle, None; Trina L. Eden, None; Chris A. Johnson, None; Monella M. Tamegnon, None; Gideon J. Zamba, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  Veterans Affairs Rehabilitation R & D Merit Review Grant
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science March 2012, Vol.53, 201. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Michael Wall, Carrie K. Doyle, Trina L. Eden, Chris A. Johnson, Monella M. Tamegnon, Gideon J. Zamba; Detection of Glaucomatous Progression Using Stimulus Size V. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2012;53(14):201.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : Stimulus size V has lower retest variability, greater dynamic range and similar ability to detect glaucoma. It therefore is a strong candidate to detect glaucomatous progression. Our aim was to test the hypothesis that standard automated perimetry using a size V stimulus would detect progression before size III.

Methods: : Sixty (60) normal subjects and 120 glaucoma patients were tested twice at baseline and every six months for 4 years with SITA standard size III and Full Threshold size V. We used the PLRA2 method of pointwise linear regression (progression confirmed at two or more locations). We chose slope and significance values so that the criteria for identifying progression had similar specificities. Using a slope of -1.2 dB / year at a p = 0.04 for size III and -1.0 dB significance level the sensitivity (hit rate)/specificity ratios of size III to size V were 38%/93% and 35%/92%. Kaplan Meyer curves were used to compare the tests.

Results: : The glaucoma patients were 66.99 ± 9.55 years with mean deviation of -9.53 ± 6.13; normals were 61.2 ± 8.9 years with mean deviation 0.11 ± .99. Kaplan Meyer curves showed no significant differences between the two tests (p = .21).

Conclusions: : Standard automated perimetry using Size III and size V stimuli have similar abilities to identify glaucomatous visual field progression. Given its greater dynamic range, size V stimuli have promise for following patients with moderate to severe stages of glaucomatous visual field damage.

Keywords: perimetry • visual fields 
×
×

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.

×