A Prospective Three-year Study of Response Properties of Normal Subjects and Patients during Automated Perimetry

Johnson, Chris; Nelson-Quigg, Jacqueline M.

doi:10.1016/s0161-6420(93)31660-x

Cited by 42 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, perimetrists and patients should be made aware that during a typical examination, around 50% of the stimuli are not expected to be seen. Appropriate and standardised patient instructions produce reliable and usable results in the vast majority of patients 43 44…”

Section: Concepts That Erroneously Hinder the Use Of Sap To Measure Pmentioning

confidence: 99%

Practical recommendations for measuring rates of visual field change in glaucoma

Chauhan

Garway-Heath

Goñi³

et al. 2008

British Journal of Ophthalmology

449

385

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To date, there has been a lack of evidence-based guidance on the frequency of visual field examinations required to identify clinically meaningful rates of change in glaucoma. The objective of this perspective is to provide practical recommendations for this purpose. The primary emphasis is on the period of time and number of examinations required to measure various rates of change in mean deviation (MD) with adequate statistical power. Empirical data were used to obtain variability estimates of MD while statistical modelling techniques derived the required time periods to detect change with various degrees of visual field variability. We provide the frequency of examinations per year required to detect different amounts of change in 2, 3 and 5 years. For instance, three examinations per year are required to identify an overall change in MD of 4 dB over 2 years in a patient with average visual field variability. Recommendations on other issues such as examination type, strategy and quality are also made.

show abstract

Section: Concepts That Erroneously Hinder the Use Of Sap To Measure Pmentioning

confidence: 99%

Practical recommendations for measuring rates of visual field change in glaucoma

Chauhan

Garway-Heath

Goñi³

et al. 2008

British Journal of Ophthalmology

449

385

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If the FN trial luminance is closer to the final threshold value than computed, the stimulus is not used as a FN catch trial. The FN catch trial rate in normal participants is 1% to 2% with well-trained perimetrists 5 and increases in frequency with decreasing sensitivity. 6 FP catch trials are responses that occur independent of a perimetric stimulus.…”

mentioning

confidence: 91%

A Comparison of Catch Trial Methods Used in Standard Automated Perimetry in Glaucoma Patients

Wall

Doyle²,

Brito³

et al. 2008

Journal of Glaucoma

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2 Other research has indicated that up to 22% of early glaucoma patients had >20% fixation losses, which was the most common source of unreliable results. 3 Approximately 22% of glaucoma patients exhibited high variability >1.5 dB for the mean deviation in a large, longitudinal study. 4 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Applying theories and interventions from behavioral medicine to understand and reduce visual field variability in patients with vision loss

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual field (VF) test results are often unreliable in visually impaired patients, but continue to be a cornerstone of clinical trials and play a vital role in clinical decision making since they are the primary method to determine patients’ functional vision loss or progression. Currently, patients are typically asked to perform VF tasks with minimal instruction or consideration of their psychological experience during the test. The gradual loss of vision due to retinal diseases, such as retinitis pigmentosa (RP), age-related macular degeneration (AMD), or glaucoma can contribute to the experience of negative psychosocial states, such as anxiety, stress, and depression, as well as diminished quality of life. We hypothesize that VF testing elicits test performance anxiety and perception of functional losses of vision, which induces distracting negative thoughts that result in increased VF test variability. Resources for processing and responding to vision-related information may be diverted from task-relevant VF stimuli to task-irrelevant ones, such as internal worry and test anxiety, thereby resulting in VF test performance decrements. We present a theoretical model to support the hypothesis that VF variability is linked to patients’ negative thoughts during VF testing. This conceptual framework provides a basis for the development of coping strategies and mindfulness-based interventions to be evaluated in future research aimed at improving psychosocial states and VF reliability in visually-impaired patients. It would be highly significant to intervene by modifying negative thoughts during VF testing to reduce test variability in glaucoma patients who are progressively losing vision to a blinding eye disease, but whose vision loss has not been accurately identified and treated early enough due to variable VF results. In clinical trials of potential interventions for RP and non-neovascular AMD, reducing VF variability would effectively increase the precision for detecting treatment effects and allow a reduction in the number of VF tests needed to estimate the treatment responses, thus reducing burden on investigators and patients, as well as saving time and money.

show abstract

A Prospective Three-year Study of Response Properties of Normal Subjects and Patients during Automated Perimetry

Cited by 42 publications

References 6 publications

Practical recommendations for measuring rates of visual field change in glaucoma

Practical recommendations for measuring rates of visual field change in glaucoma

A Comparison of Catch Trial Methods Used in Standard Automated Perimetry in Glaucoma Patients

Applying theories and interventions from behavioral medicine to understand and reduce visual field variability in patients with vision loss

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About