May 2005
Volume 46, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2005
Association Between Frequency Doubling Perimetry (FDP) and Standard Automated Perimetry: The Los Angeles Latino Eye Study (LALES)
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • L.T. Tong
    Ophthalmology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
  • M. Ying–Lai
    Ophthalmology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
  • B. Francis
    Ophthalmology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
  • R. Varma
    Ophthalmology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
  • LALES Group
    Ophthalmology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  L.T. Tong, None; M. Ying–Lai, None; B. Francis, None; R. Varma, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  NIH Grant EY11753, RPB
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2005, Vol.46, 4661. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      L.T. Tong, M. Ying–Lai, B. Francis, R. Varma, LALES Group; Association Between Frequency Doubling Perimetry (FDP) and Standard Automated Perimetry: The Los Angeles Latino Eye Study (LALES) . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2005;46(13):4661.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Abstract: : Purpose: To determine the sensitivity and specificity of frequency doubling perimetry (FDP) in detecting glaucomatous visual field loss on standard automated perimetry in a population–based study. Methods: The Los Angeles Latino Eye Study is a population–based study of visual impairment and eye disease in adult Latinos in Los Angeles, CA. Each participant in the study underwent a complete eye examination including measurement of visual acuity, intraocular pressure, stereoscopic optic disc photographs, and functional testing with the FDP (screening mode 20–1) and Humphrey visual field (SITA standard 24–2). The severity of the FDP defects were classified as the following: "none" when no defects were seen on testing; "mild" when 1 or 2 mild defects but no moderate or severe defects were present; "moderate" when 3 or more mild defects, or 1 or 2 moderate defects but no severe defects were present; "severe" when 4 mild defects, 3 or more moderate defects, or any severe defect was present. Glaucomatous visual field loss on the SITA standard was determined by a consensus of 3 fellowship–trained glaucoma specialists. The sensitivity and specificity, of each severity level of FDP defect, for detecting glaucomatous visual field loss was determined. Results: 11,651 eyes of 5856 individuals was included in this analysis. In this sample, 9033 eyes were classified as "none," 688 eyes as "mild," 709 eyes as "moderate," and 1221 eyes as "severe" on the FDP severity classification. The sensitivities and specificities for mild, moderate, and severe levels of FDP defects for detecting glaucomatous visual field loss on the SITA standard were 13.2%, 19.2%, 37.9%, and 93.5%, 93.9%, 91.5%, respectively. Conclusions: In our sample, using the above described severity classification, the FDP was highly specific for detecting glaucomatous visual field loss. However, the sensitivity for detecting visual field loss was poor. The screening mode of the FDP, using this classification, is not ideal for identifying glaucomatous visual field loss in population–based screenings.

Keywords: visual fields • clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: prevalence/incidence 
×
×

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.

×