Quantitative Measurement of Fixation Stability During RareBit Perimetry and Humphrey Visual Field Testing

Lin, Shoutzu; Lai, Isabella N.; Dutta, Sanjeev; Singh, Kuldev; Chang, Robert

doi:10.1097/ijg.0b013e31829d9b41

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the wearable eye-tracking glasses had the same sampling rate of 30 Hz in our study and in the study by Lin at al. [22], the fixation behavior in the current study (0.4° to 0.6°) was lower than that obtained in the study by Lin and colleagues. The difference in the results might be due to the fact that the student volunteers recruited in the current study had adequate understanding of and experience undergoing the visual field test.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 94%

“…A study of 14 healthy participants by Lin et al [22] reported that fixation behavior during Humphrey SAP 10–2 with Point fixation targets (approximately 1.1°) had a mean of 2.9°. Although the wearable eye-tracking glasses had the same sampling rate of 30 Hz in our study and in the study by Lin at al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, fundus perimetry is performed using the direct projection method rather than real-space and dome-shaped instruments such as the HFA or OCTOPUS 900 perimeter. In addition, most previous studies have evaluated fixation behavior within only a 10° visual field [4,12,21,22]. Hence, fixation behavior should be quantitatively evaluated in a visual field of 30°, commonly used in clinical practice, such as implemented in the 30–2 or 24–2 program of the HFA and the 32 or G program of the Octopus perimeter.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Smaller Fixation Target Size Is Associated with More Stable Fixation and Less Variance in Threshold Sensitivity

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aims of this randomized observational case control study were to quantify fixation behavior during standard automated perimetry (SAP) with different fixation targets and to evaluate the relationship between fixation behavior and threshold variability at each test point in healthy young participants experienced with perimetry. SAP was performed on the right eyes of 29 participants using the Octopus 900 perimeter, program 32, dynamic strategy. The fixation targets of Point, Cross, and Ring were used for SAP. Fixation behavior was recorded using a wearable eye-tracking glass. All participants underwent SAP twice with each fixation target in a random fashion. Fixation behavior was quantified by calculating the bivariate contour ellipse area (BCEA) and the frequency of deviation from the fixation target. The BCEAs (deg2) of Point, Cross, and Ring targets were 1.11, 1.46, and 2.02, respectively. In all cases, BCEA increased significantly with increasing fixation target size (p < 0.05). The logarithmic value of BCEA demonstrated the same tendency (p < 0.05). A positive correlation was identified between fixation behavior and threshold variability for the Point and Cross targets (ρ = 0.413–0.534, p < 0.05). Fixation behavior increased with increasing fixation target size. Moreover, a larger fixation behavior tended to be associated with a higher threshold variability. A small fixation target is recommended during the visual field test.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 94%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Smaller Fixation Target Size Is Associated with More Stable Fixation and Less Variance in Threshold Sensitivity

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies have reported that fixation disturbances during visual field testing increase with increasing target size 35 36 , in glaucoma patients 37 , and with increasing magnitude of the visual field defect 38 . It has also been reported that slight fixation disturbances of approximately 2.9° can occur during reliable visual field testing 39 and that fixation disturbances of <2.5° occur in up to 60% of reliable visual field tests 40 . Additionally, ganglion cells are most heavily concentrated in the macular area, and ganglion cell density decreases as eccentricity increases 41 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Comparison of size modulation and conventional standard automated perimetry with the 24-2 test protocol in glaucoma patients

Hirasawa

Shoji

Kasahara

et al. 2016

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This prospective randomized study compared test results of size modulation standard automated perimetry (SM-SAP) performed with the Octopus 600 and conventional SAP (C-SAP) performed with the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) in glaucoma patients. Eighty-eight eyes of 88 glaucoma patients underwent SM-SAP and C-SAP tests with the Octopus 600 24-2 Dynamic and HFA 24-2 SITA-Standard, respectively. Fovea threshold, mean defect, and square loss variance of SM-SAP were significantly correlated with the corresponding C-SAP indices (P < 0.001). The false-positive rate was slightly lower, and false-negative rate slightly higher, with SM-SAP than C-SAP (P = 0.002). Point-wise threshold values obtained with SM-SAP were moderately to strongly correlated with those obtained with C-SAP (P < 0.001). The correlation coefficients of the central zone were significantly lower than those of the middle to peripheral zone (P = 0.031). The size and depth of the visual field (VF) defect were smaller (P = 0.039) and greater (P = 0.043), respectively, on SM-SAP than on C-SAP. Although small differences were observed in VF sensitivity in the central zone, the defect size and depth and the reliability indices between SM-SAP and C-SAP, global indices of the two testing modalities were well correlated.

show abstract

“…29 In addition, other studies have reported fixation behavior of 0.43° to 2.9° during SAP. 30,31 It is thought that fixation behavior during VF measurement affects the repeatability of each test point in patients with early and moderate glaucoma, who exhibit normal and relatively defective areas.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic Ability and Repeatability of a New Supra-Threshold Glaucoma Screening Program in Standard Automated Perimetry

Takahashi

Hirasawa

Hoshina

et al. 2017

Trans. Vis. Sci. Tech.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeWe assess the diagnostic ability and repeatability of a new suprathreshold glaucoma screening test (GST) comprising 28 test points and a 1-of-3 sampling strategy at 95% of the normal limit for standard automated perimetry (SAP) in early to advanced glaucoma.MethodsThis prospective cross-sectional study included 96 eyes of patients with early, moderate, or advanced glaucoma and 37 eyes of normal controls. Participants were evaluated by the G-Dynamic threshold test once and the GST twice, in random order, using the Octopus 600 perimeter. The diagnostic ability of GST was assessed by comparison with the G-Dynamic threshold obtained by receiver operating characteristic analysis. Repeatability was assessed by κ statistics for agreement on glaucoma diagnosis and each test point.ResultsAlthough the G-Dynamic test exhibited significantly higher areas under the curve (AUC) than the GST1st (P = 0.009) in early glaucoma, there were no significant differences in any other AUCs between the two methods. The κ values for repeatability of glaucoma diagnosis and each test point were 0.747 to 1.0 and 0.537 to 1.0, respectively. The duration of the GST in the control and early glaucoma groups was less than a minute, while that in the moderate and advanced glaucoma groups was within 1.5 minutes.ConclusionThe diagnostic ability of the new suprathreshold GST for early to advanced glaucoma was high, with moderate to strong repeatability and short test duration.Translational RelevanceThere currently are no prominent suprathreshold screening strategies using SAP. The GST would be an effective clinical method for glaucoma screening.

show abstract

Quantitative Measurement of Fixation Stability During RareBit Perimetry and Humphrey Visual Field Testing

Cited by 6 publications

References 22 publications

Smaller Fixation Target Size Is Associated with More Stable Fixation and Less Variance in Threshold Sensitivity

Smaller Fixation Target Size Is Associated with More Stable Fixation and Less Variance in Threshold Sensitivity

Comparison of size modulation and conventional standard automated perimetry with the 24-2 test protocol in glaucoma patients

Diagnostic Ability and Repeatability of a New Supra-Threshold Glaucoma Screening Program in Standard Automated Perimetry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About