Purchase this article with an account.
C.B. Younger, C. Brito, C.K. Doyle, K.R. Woodward, R.H. Kardon, M. Wall; Variability in Objective and Subjective Perimetry: Comparison Between Humphrey Size III SITA and Accumap mfVEP . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2006;47(13):3995.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
to compare retest variability between subjective – Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) and objective – AccuMap multifocal visual evoked potential perimetry (mfVEP).
Eleven glaucoma patients agreed to be tested once a week for five consecutive weeks. Each visit included a subjective visual field threshold test using the SITA standard size III with HFA, and an objective visual field test (mfVEP). Coefficients of variation (CV) were calculated and the methods were compared using a t–test.
There was a significant difference in variability between HFA and AccuMap mfVEP (p<.002), with SITA (Mean=.159, SD=.150) showing 2.6% more variability in CV than mfVEP (Mean=.133, SD=.061). Coefficient of variation was plotted against mean sensitivity to compare variability over each test’s measurement range (Figure).
The mfVEP is slightly less variable than HFA perimetry in repeated testing and remains relatively constant across most of its range. The 2.6% difference in CV is not likely clinically significant.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only