Expediency of the Automated Perimetry Using the Goldmann V Stimulus Size in Visually Impaired Patients with Glaucoma
- PMID: 30868416
- PMCID: PMC6513955
- DOI: 10.1007/s40123-019-0175-9
Expediency of the Automated Perimetry Using the Goldmann V Stimulus Size in Visually Impaired Patients with Glaucoma
Abstract
Introduction: White-on-white standard automated perimetry (AP) uses a white round stimulus with 0.43° diameter and 4.0 mm2 area (Goldmann size III). Patients with low vision have difficulty seeing such a small stimulus and are often tested with perimetry using the size V stimulus with 1.72° diameter and 64 mm2 area. We undertook an observational case-control study to compare the performance of patients on AP using two differently sized stimuli.
Methods: Patients with glaucoma and visual acuity worse than 20/100 underwent AP using the standard size III stimulus Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) standard test and size V stimulus full threshold test. All patients were familiar with the procedure, having done the test at least twice previously. Another group of glaucoma patients with visual acuity better than 20/40 served as controls. The main outcome measures included test time, mean retinal sensitivity (MRS), foveal sensitivity (FS), fixation loss (FL), false positive (FP), false negative (FN), and the patient's subjective preference.
Results: Fifty patients were included in the study. Most preferred the size V stimulus target size test. For glaucoma patients, test time was shorter with size III; MRS and FS were higher with size V; FL, FP, and FN did not differ between the tests.
Conclusion: AP with stimulus size V may be a good alternative to standard size III in selected visually debilitated patients who report difficulty undergoing a standard SITA 24-2 test.
Keywords: Automated perimetry; Glaucoma; Psychophysics; Stimulus size; Visual field.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Variability in patients with glaucomatous visual field damage is reduced using size V stimuli.Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1997 Feb;38(2):426-35. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1997. PMID: 9040476
-
Can Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm fast perimetry be used as an alternative to goldmann perimetry in neuro-ophthalmic practice?Arch Ophthalmol. 2002 Sep;120(9):1162-73. doi: 10.1001/archopht.120.9.1162. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002. PMID: 12215089
-
Threshold Automated Perimetry of the Full Visual Field in Patients With Glaucoma With Mild Visual Loss.J Glaucoma. 2019 Nov;28(11):997-1005. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000001372. J Glaucoma. 2019. PMID: 31567907
-
Selective perimetry in glaucoma diagnosis.Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2007 Mar;18(2):115-21. doi: 10.1097/ICU.0b013e3280555096. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2007. PMID: 17301612 Review.
-
Recent developments in automated perimetry in glaucoma diagnosis and management.Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2002 Apr;13(2):77-84. doi: 10.1097/00055735-200204000-00004. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2002. PMID: 11880719 Review.
Cited by
-
Standard automated perimetry using size III and size V stimuli in advanced stage glaucoma: an observational cross-sectional comparative study.BMJ Open. 2021 Sep 28;11(9):e046124. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046124. BMJ Open. 2021. PMID: 34588233 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Wall M, Kutzko KE, Chauhan CBC. Variability in patients with glaucomatous visual field damage is reduced using size V stimuli. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1997;38:426–35. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous