advertisement
Abstract #20851 Published in IGR 10-1
A Comparison of Semiautomated Versus Manual Goldmann Kinetic Perimetry in Patients With Visually Significant Glaucoma
Ramirez AM; Chaya CJ; Gordon LK; Giaconi JAJournal of Glaucoma 2008; 17: 111-117
PURPOSE: To determine if semiautomated kinetic perimetry (SKP) is reproducible and comparable to Goldmann manual kinetic perimetry (GVF). METHODS: Glaucoma patients were recruited to perform visual field testing using GVF and SKP. Specific isopters were tested, quantified, and compared. Visual field patterns were analyzed for shape and defect. RESULTS: Ten patients (16 eyes) underwent visual field studies using SKP and GVF, and 8 patients completed a second SKP on a different day. Individual isopter areas were similar between GVF and SKP, although 60% of isopters were larger on SKP by an average of 15%. This was statistically significant for the smaller isopters, I4e (P=0.02) and I2e (P=0.05). Retesting with SKP on a separate day, showed similar isopter areas (P values=0.3 to 1.0), however, the exact location of isopters in degrees from central fixation tended to vary with the smaller test object sizes. Isopter position in degrees from the central axis agreed in at least 3 quadrants in approximately 65% of fields compared. SKP visual field defects and patterns were similar between test strategies. CONCLUSIONS: SKP and GVF testing produce similar visual field results in glaucoma patients, and SKP testing seems to be reliable and reproducible in this population. However, overlapping isopters, typically associated with nonorganic vision loss, and jagged isopters were sometimes observed in SKP visual fields. Further study of SKP is needed to explore these findings.
Classification:
6.6.1 Conventional manual (Part of: 6 Clinical examination methods > 6.6 Visual field examination and other visual function tests)
6.6.2 Automated (Part of: 6 Clinical examination methods > 6.6 Visual field examination and other visual function tests)