Evaluation of a new threshold visual field strategy, SITA, in normal subjects

Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica

Volumn 76, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 165-169

  Bengtsson, Boel ^a   Heijl, Anders ^a   Olsson, Jonny ^b  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Clinical testing; Computerized threshold perimetry; Visual field strategies

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED PERIMETRY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TIME; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL STIMULATION;

EID: 0031976913     PISSN: 13953907     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0420.1998.760208.x     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Bengtsson B, Olsson J, Heijl A & Rootzén H (1997): A new generation of algorithms for computerized threshold perimetry. SITA. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 75: 368-375.
2. Flammer J, Drance SM & Schulzer M (1984): Covariates of the long-term fluctuation of differential light threshold. Arch Ophthalmol 102: 880-882.
3. Flanagan JG, Wild JM & Trope GE (1993): Evaluation of Fastpac, a new strategy for threshold estimation with the Humphrey field Analyzer, in a glaucomatous population. Ophthalmology 100: 949-954.
4. Haley MJ (1986): The Field Analyzer primer. Allergan Humphrey. San Leandro, CA.
5. Heijl A (1977): Computer test logics for automated perimetry. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh.) 55: 15-31.
6. Heijl A (1977): Time changes of contrast thresholds during automatic perimetry. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh.) 55: 696-708.
7. Heijl A (1985): The Humphrey Field Analyzer, construction and concepts. In: Heijl & Greve (eds.) Documenta Ophthalmol. Proc. series 42: 77-84. Proceedings of the 6th International Perimetric Society Meeting 1984. Junk Publishers, Dordrecht.
8. Heijl A and Drance SM (1983): Changes in differential threshold in patients with glaucoma during prolonged perimetry. Br J Ophthalmol 67: 512-516.
9. Heijl A, Lindgren A & Lindgren G (1989): Test-retest variability in glaucomatous visual fields. Am J Ophthalmol 108: 130-135.
10. Heijl A, Lindgren G & Olsson J (1987): Normal variability of static perimetric threshold values across the central field. Arch Ophthalmol 105: 1544-1549.
11. Hudson C, Wild JM & O'Neill EC (1994): Fatigue effects during a single session of automated static threshold perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 35: 268-280.
12. Iwase A, Kitazawa Y & Kato Y (1993): Clinical value of Fastpac: a comparative study with the standard full threshold method. In: Mills (ed). Perimetry Update 1992/1993 pp 365-367. Proceedings of the 10th International Perimetric Society Meeting 1992. Kugler Publications, Amsterdam.
13. Johnson CA, Chauhan BC & Shapiro LR (1992): Properties of staircase procedures for estimating thresholds in automated perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 33: 2966-2974.
14. Katz J & Sommer A (1986): Asymmetry and variation in the normal hill of vision. Arch Ophthalmol 104: 65-68.
15. Langerhorst CT (1988): Automated perimetry in glaucoma. Fluctuation behaviour and general and local reduction of sensitivity. pp. 53-65. Kugler & Ghedini, Amsterdam.
16. Lewis RA, Johnson CA, Keltner JL & Labermeier PK (1986): Variability of quantitative automated perimetry in normal observers. Ophthalmology 93: 878-881.
17. Olsson J, Bengtsson B, Heijl A & Rootzén H (1997): An improved method to estimate frequency of false positive answers in computerized perimetry. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 75: 184-188.
18. Olsson J, Heijl A, Bengtsson B & Rootzén H (1993): Frequency-of-seeing in computerized perimetry. In: Mills (ed.) Perimetry Update 1992/1993 pp. 551-556, Proceeding of the 10th International Perimetric Society Meeting 1992, Kugler, Amsterdam.
19. Schaumberger M, Schafer B & Lachenmayr BJ (1995): Glaucomatous visual fields. Fastpac versus Full Threshold strategy of The Humphrey Field Analyzer. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 36: 1390-1397.
20. Weber J & Rau S (1992): The properties of perimetric thresholds in normal and glaucomatous eyes. Ger J Ophthalmol 1: 79-85.