April 2010
Volume 51, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2010
Perimetry Instrument Comparison Study: Between Test Variability of Four Threshold Perimetry Tests in Healthy and ‘Glaucomatous’ Eyes (Interim Analysis)
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • A. Sinapis
    NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom
  • C. Bergin
    Optometry and Visual Sciences, City University London, London, United Kingdom
  • D. Sinapis
    NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom
  • R. A. Russell
    NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom
  • R. Moosavi
    NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom
  • C. Balian
    School of Optometry, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
  • G. M. Verdon-Roe
    NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom
  • J. Flanagan
    School of Optometry, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
    Department of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • D. P. Crabb
    Optometry and Visual Sciences, City University London, London, United Kingdom
  • D. F. Garway-Heath
    NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom
    Bietti Foundation, Rome, Italy
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  A. Sinapis, None; C. Bergin, Moorfields MDT, P; D. Sinapis, None; R.A. Russell, None; R. Moosavi, None; C. Balian, None; G.M. Verdon-Roe, Pfizer, F; Moorfields MDT, P; J. Flanagan, Heidelberg Engineering, F; Optovue Inc., F; Heidelberg Engineering, C; Heidelberg Engineering, R; D.P. Crabb, Moorfields MDT, P; D.F. Garway-Heath, Carl Zeiss Meditec, F; Heidelberg Engineering, F; Moorfields MDT, P; Carl Zeiss Meditec, R.
  • Footnotes
    Support  Unrestricted research support from Pfizer
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2010, Vol.51, 5506. doi:https://doi.org/
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      A. Sinapis, C. Bergin, D. Sinapis, R. A. Russell, R. Moosavi, C. Balian, G. M. Verdon-Roe, J. Flanagan, D. P. Crabb, D. F. Garway-Heath; Perimetry Instrument Comparison Study: Between Test Variability of Four Threshold Perimetry Tests in Healthy and ‘Glaucomatous’ Eyes (Interim Analysis). Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2010;51(13):5506. doi: https://doi.org/.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : To consider interim results comparing the between test variability characteristics of the threshold strategies of four perimetry devices.

Methods: : One-hundred and two, from a planned 320, participants have been tested in a four centre study of perimetry instruments (mean age=60 years, range 20 to 83 years). Selection criteria for patients were: (i) Heidelberg Retina Tomograph (HRT) Moorfields Regression Analysis (MRA) ‘Outside Normal Limits’; rim area >0.5mm2 and (ii) intraocular pressure (IOP) >21mmHg at referral; <26mmHg at time of testing. Healthy subjects had HRT MRA ‘Within Normal Limits’ and IOP ≤21mmHg. Thus, the reference standard for ‘glaucoma’ was independent of perimetry. One eye of each subject was tested on two occasions within 15 weeks with Standard Automated Perimetry (SAP, 24-2 SITA standard), Frequency Doubling Technology Perimeter (FDT, 24-2 ZEST), Heidelberg Edge Perimeter (HEP) and the Moorfields Motion Displacement Test (MDT). Test order was randomized. To evaluate the between-test variability of each instrument, Bland-Altman plots and repeatability coefficients (RCs) were obtained from pairs of measurements (Z-scored by the standard deviation of normative values) for the 32 between-device matched test locations.

Results: : The Bland-Altman plots suggested that between-test variability was lowest in HEP; while SAP, FDT and MDT appeared to have higher variability. The results were confirmed by the RC of each instrument. RCs for SAP, FDT, HEP and MDT were 0.37, 0.58, 0.21 and 0.45, respectively.

Conclusions: : Repeated visual field measurements were found to be least variable, relative to between-individual normal variation, for HEP, followed by SAP, then MDT, then FDT. However, imprecision in estimating the normal ranges for some devices may explain the larger variability in these devices.Acknowledgement of Collaborators: L. Tanga, M. Michelessi, F. Oddone (Bietti Foundation, Rome, Italy)G. Sharpe, P. Artes (Dalhousie University, Halifax NS, Canada)

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.

×