April 2011
Volume 52, Issue 14
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2011
How Does A Change In The Visual Field Index Relate To Pointwise Visual Vield Progression?
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Rizwan Malik
    Glaucoma Research Unit, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom
  • Richard A. Russell
    Glaucoma Research Unit, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom
  • David P. Crabb
    Optometry and Visual Science, London City University, London, United Kingdom
  • David F. Garway-Heath
    Glaucoma Research Unit, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  Rizwan Malik, None; Richard A. Russell, None; David P. Crabb, None; David F. Garway-Heath, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  NIHR
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2011, Vol.52, 4152. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Rizwan Malik, Richard A. Russell, David P. Crabb, David F. Garway-Heath; How Does A Change In The Visual Field Index Relate To Pointwise Visual Vield Progression?. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2011;52(14):4152.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract
 
Purpose:
 

Visual field (VF) global indices are less variable than point sensitivities in patients at risk of glaucoma and may assist the clinician to identify progression. The aim of this study was to assess whether a change in pointwise VF sensitivity is accompanied by a change in the Visual Field Index (VFI) in patients with Ocular Hypertension (OHT).

 
Methods:
 

Humphrey 24-2 Full-threshold VFs were analyzed from a longitudinal series of 194 patients with OHT at Moorfields Eye Hospital from 1992-2000. The VFI was computed for each time-point and overall change evaluated by linear regression analysis. Pointwise VF progression was defined by linear regression of sensitivity over time, progression was flagged if the slope was less than -1 dB / year (p<0.05) for ‘central points’ or less than -2 dB / year (p<0.05) for ‘edge points’. The change in VFI (slope, %/year) was computed and the correlation between the number of progressing points and VFI slope assessed, Figure 1.

 
Results:
 

The median (IQR) age of the patients at baseline was 63 (56-71) years, with median follow-up of 6.0 (5.4-6.5) years. The results are summarised in Figure 1. There was a highly significant correlation between the change in VFI and the number of progressing points (Spearman's rank correlation rho =-0.59, p<0.001%). In some patients, pointwise sensitivity decline was associated with an improvement in VFI.

 
Conclusions:
 

On average, in OHT patients, pointwise sensitivity decline was accompanied by a decline in VFI. A change in VFI may assist the clinician in identifying patients with VF progression; however, VF progression may be missed if only VFI is considered, so pointwise sensitivity data should also be carefully examined.  

 
Keywords: 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.

×