» Articles » PMID: 21357405

What Reduction in Standard Automated Perimetry Variability Would Improve the Detection of Visual Field Progression?

Overview
Specialty Ophthalmology
Date 2011 Mar 2
PMID 21357405
Citations 26
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

PURPOSE. The test-retest variability of standard automated perimetry (SAP) severely limits its ability to detect sensitivity decline. Numerous improvements in procedures have been proposed, but assessment of their benefits requires quantification of how much variability reduction results in meaningful benefit. This article determines how much reduction in SAP procedure variability is necessary to permit earlier detection of visual field deterioration. METHOD. Computer simulation and statistical analysis were used. Gaussian distributions were fit to the probability of observing any sensitivity measurement obtained with SAP and the Full Threshold algorithm to model current variability. The standard deviation of these Gaussians was systematically reduced to model a reduction of SAP variability. Progression detection ability was assessed by using pointwise linear regression on decreases of -1 and -2 dB/year from 20 and 30 dB, with a custom criteria that fixed detection specificity at 95%. Test visits occurring twice and thrice per annum are modeled, and analysis was performed on single locations and whole fields. RESULTS. A 30% to 60% reduction in SAP variability was required to detect pointwise deterioration 1 year earlier than current methods, depending on progression rate and visit frequency. A reduction of 20% in variability generally allowed progression to be detected one visit earlier. CONCLUSIONS. On average, the variability of SAP procedures must be reduced by approximately 20% for a clinically appreciable improvement in detection of visual field change. Analysis similar to that demonstrated can measure the improvement required of new procedures, assisting in cost-benefit assessment for the adoption of new techniques, before lengthy and expensive clinical trials.

Citing Articles

Glaucoma Home Self-Testing Using VR Visual Fields and Rebound Tonometry Versus In-Clinic Perimetry and Goldmann Applanation Tonometry: A Pilot Study.

Berneshawi A, Shue A, Chang R Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2024; 13(8):7.

PMID: 39102241 PMC: 11309035. DOI: 10.1167/tvst.13.8.7.


Repeatability of a Virtual Reality Headset Perimeter in Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertensive Patients.

Nascimento E Silva R, Kim J, Li Y, Chen C, Chaudhry A, Berneshawi A Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2024; 13(6):14.

PMID: 38899952 PMC: 11193066. DOI: 10.1167/tvst.13.6.14.


Long-term variability of retinal nerve fibre layer thickness measurement in patients with glaucoma of African and European descents.

Wu J, Moghimi S, Walker E, Nishida T, Liebmann J, Fazio M Br J Ophthalmol. 2024; 108(8):1094-1100.

PMID: 38164556 PMC: 11153332. DOI: 10.1136/bjo-2023-324404.


Time to Glaucoma Progression Detection by Optical Coherence Tomography in Individuals of African and European Descents.

Wu J, Moghimi S, Walker E, Nishida T, Brye N, Mahmoudinezhad G Am J Ophthalmol. 2023; 260:60-69.

PMID: 38061585 PMC: 11684426. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2023.12.002.


Improving the Accuracy and Speed of Visual Field Testing in Glaucoma With Structural Information and Deep Learning.

Montesano G, Lazaridis G, Ometto G, Crabb D, Garway-Heath D Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2023; 12(10):10.

PMID: 37831447 PMC: 10587851. DOI: 10.1167/tvst.12.10.10.