advertisement
Abstract #78496 Published in IGR 20-1
Performance of the 10-2 and 24-2 Visual Field Tests for Detecting Central Visual Field Abnormalities in Glaucoma
Wu Z; Medeiros FA; Weinreb RN; Zangwill LMAmerican Journal of Ophthalmology 2018; 196: 10-17
PURPOSE: To compare the performance of the pattern standard deviation (PSD) values derived from the central 12 locations of the 24-2 visual field test (C24-2) to the entire 10-2 test for detecting central visual field abnormalities in eyes with, suspected of having, or at risk of having glaucoma. DESIGN: Cross-sectional case-control study. METHODS: Eyes with, suspected of having, or at risk of having glaucoma, based on masked grading of optic disc stereophotographs and/or ocular hypertension (intraocular pressure ≥ 22 mm Hg) were included as cases (n = 523). Eyes from healthy participants were included as controls (n = 107) to allow the 2 tests to be compared at matched specificities. The sensitivity to detect cases at 95% specificity using PSD values derived from the entire 10-2 test and C24-2 were compared. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the 10-2 and C24-2 PSD values was not significantly different between the 10-2 and C24-2 at matched specificities (35.9% and 35.4% respectively; P = .900). There was also a substantial agreement between the cases detected by both methods (kappa = 0.80 ± 0.04), and a very strong association between the PSD values from the 2 methods (R = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: 10-2 and 24-2 tests identified a similar number of eyes with, suspected of having, or at risk of having glaucoma as having central visual field abnormalities using PSD values. These findings do not mean that 10-2 tests are not useful, but highlight the need for further studies to determine the potential advantages of 10-2 tests through equivalent comparisons against 24-2 tests to ensure appropriate recommendations are made about its incorporation into the glaucoma standard of care.
Hamilton Glaucoma Center, Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA; Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Ophthalmology, Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: wu.z@unimelb.edu.au.
Full articleClassification:
6.6.2 Automated (Part of: 6 Clinical examination methods > 6.6 Visual field examination and other visual function tests)
