Variability of Static Visual Threshold Responses in Patients With Elevated IOPs

Werner, Elliot B.; Saheb, Nabil; Thomas, Duncan C.

doi:10.1001/archopht.1982.01030040605010

Cited by 44 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Clinical trials have detected both an increased rate of yellow-blue and blue-green deficiencies and a foveal loss of sensitivity to blue targets in glaucoma and ocular hypertension [1,4,7]. Experimental devices have proved their efficacy [1], but up to now both central testing and color perimetry performed using common clinical equipments have not succeeded in identifying early glaucomatous damage [2,8,10,14]. What is needed is a sensitive, reliable, standardized, quick and inexpensive psychophys~cal test of foveal function.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 43%

Clinical detection of early glaucomatous foveal involvement

et al. 1989

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of our study was to verify whether threshold testing of the central area with a common automated perimeter could detect early glaucomatous damage. We selected 9 eyes of 9 patients with suspected primary open angle glaucoma and normal visual fields and 18 eyes of 18 age-matched normal subjects. They underwent the Macula Threshold Test of the Humphrey Field Analyzer using white and blue targets. We found no significant difference in retinal sensitivity to white targets between the two groups. Sensitivity to blue targets was significantly lower among glaucoma suspects (18.43 +/- 1.14 dB) than in the control group (22.37 +/- 0.94 dB) p less than 0.001). Blue thresholds related significantly to age only in normals (p = 0.028) while in glaucoma suspects they were strongly related to vertical cup/disc ratios (p less than 0.001). These results suggest that it is possible to detect early central visual disturbances from glaucoma using an automated perimeter and its built-in color filters.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 43%

Clinical detection of early glaucomatous foveal involvement

et al. 1989

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Difficulties in detection of defect relate primarily to distinguishing appropriately between short-term and long-term fluctuation. This problem is further compounded in various disease states, such as glaucoma, in which the pathological process itself produces fluctuation in sensitivity [13]. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study used multiple confirmation fields to diagnose the presence or absence of a defect and provides an example of a method to deal with clinical detection of visual field defects [14].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and validation of a computerized expert system for evaluation of automated visual fields from the Ischemic Optic Neuropathy Decompression Trial

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The objective of this report is to describe the methods used to develop and validate a computerized system to analyze Humphrey visual fields obtained from patients with non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION) and enrolled in the Ischemic Optic Neuropathy Decompression Trial (IONDT). The IONDT was a multicenter study that included randomized and non-randomized patients with newly diagnosed NAION in the study eye. At baseline, randomized eyes had visual acuity of 20/64 or worse and non-randomized eyes had visual acuity of better than 20/64 or were associated with patients refusing randomization. Visual fields were measured before treatment using the Humphrey Field Analyzer with the 24-2 program, foveal threshold, and size III stimulus.

show abstract

“…Normal-appearing visual fields in ocular hypertension may be expected to demonstrate less variability than fields showing glaucoma [23,24,87]. At interim analysis, however, a high false-positive rate necessitated stricter criteria for confirming field defects.…”

Section: Assessing Visual Field Progression In Clinical Trialsmentioning

confidence: 38%

Interpreting glaucoma progression by white-on-white perimetry

Tan

Franks

Hitchings

2002

Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sequential automated static perimetry is commonly used to test whether glaucoma is progressing, but its interpretation depends on analysing complex numerical data and can be complicated. Various methods of analysis - both subjective and objective - can be used, but these methods differ in their interpretation of change. Test fluctuation and media opacities can also confound the evaluation of change. Recently, innovations in perimetric testing and analysis have sought to provide solutions. This article reviews what is known about the nature of visual field progression and examines the usefulness of perimetry in detecting worsening glaucoma.

show abstract

Variability of Static Visual Threshold Responses in Patients With Elevated IOPs

Cited by 44 publications

References 13 publications

Clinical detection of early glaucomatous foveal involvement

Clinical detection of early glaucomatous foveal involvement

Development and validation of a computerized expert system for evaluation of automated visual fields from the Ischemic Optic Neuropathy Decompression Trial

Interpreting glaucoma progression by white-on-white perimetry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About