» Articles » PMID: 33436922

A Case Control Study Examining the Feasibility of Using Eye Tracking Perimetry to Differentiate Patients with Glaucoma from Healthy Controls

Overview
Journal Sci Rep
Specialty Science
Date 2021 Jan 13
PMID 33436922
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

To explore the feasibility of using Saccadic Vector Optokinetic Perimetry (SVOP) to differentiate glaucomatous and healthy eyes. A prospective case-control study was performed using a convenience sample recruited from a single university glaucoma clinic and a group of healthy controls. SVOP and standard automated perimetry (SAP) was performed with testing order randomised. The reference standard was a diagnosis of glaucoma based a comprehensive ophthalmic examination and abnormality on standard automated perimetry (SAP). The index test was SVOP. 31 patients with glaucoma and 24 healthy subjects were included. Mean SAP mean deviation (MD) in those with glaucoma was - 8.7 ± 7.4 dB, with mean SAP and SVOP sensitivities of 23.3 ± 0.9 dB and 22.1 ± 4.3 dB respectively. Participants with glaucoma were significantly older. On average, SAP sensitivity was 1.2 ± 1.4 dB higher than SVOP (95% limits of agreement = - 1.6 to 4.0 dB). SVOP sensitivity had good ability to differentiate healthy and glaucomatous eyes with a 95% CI for area under the curve (AUC) of 0.84 to 0.96, similar to the performance of SAP sensitivity (95% CI 0.86 to 0.97, P = 0.60). For 80% specificity, SVOP had a 95% CI sensitivity of 75.7% to 94.8% compared to 77.8% to 96.0% for SAP. SVOP took considerably longer to perform (514 ± 54 s compared to 267 ± 76 s for SAP). Eye tracking perimetry may be useful for detection of glaucoma but further studies are needed to evaluate SVOP within its intended sphere of use, using an appropriate design and independent reference standard.

Citing Articles

Analysis of research hotspots and trends in pediatric ophthalmopathy based on 10 years of WoSCC literature.

Jia Q, Wang X, Li X, Xie C, Zhang Q, Mu J Front Pediatr. 2024; 12:1405110.

PMID: 38873588 PMC: 11171143. DOI: 10.3389/fped.2024.1405110.


Patients Prefer a Virtual Reality Approach Over a Similarly Performing Screen-Based Approach for Continuous Oculomotor-Based Screening of Glaucomatous and Neuro-Ophthalmological Visual Field Defects.

Soans R, Renken R, John J, Bhongade A, Raj D, Saxena R Front Neurosci. 2021; 15:745355.

PMID: 34690682 PMC: 8526798. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2021.745355.

References
1.
Simkin S, Misra S, Kasture A, McGhee C, Dai S . Clinical applicability of the Saccadic Vector Optokinetic Perimeter in children with and without visual impairment. Clin Exp Optom. 2018; 102(1):70-78. DOI: 10.1111/cxo.12803. View

2.
Griffith J, Goldberg J . The Frequency of Optical Coherence Tomography Testing in Glaucoma at a Single Academic Medical Center. J Glaucoma. 2015; 25(3):e241-7. PMC: 4885912. DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000306. View

3.
Medeiros F, Sample P, Zangwill L, Liebmann J, Girkin C, Weinreb R . A statistical approach to the evaluation of covariate effects on the receiver operating characteristic curves of diagnostic tests in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006; 47(6):2520-7. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.05-1441. View

4.
Bengtsson , Heijl . False-negative responses in glaucoma perimetry: indicators of patient performance or test reliability?. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000; 130(5):689. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9394(00)00758-3. View

5.
Ludbrook J . Confidence in Altman-Bland plots: a critical review of the method of differences. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2009; 37(2):143-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1681.2009.05288.x. View