Test-retest variability in structural and functional parameters of glaucoma damage in the glaucoma imaging longitudinal study

Journal of Glaucoma

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 152-157

  Jampel, Henry D ^a,c   Vitale, Susan ^b   Ding, Yulan ^a   Quigley, Harry ^a   Friedman, David ^a   Congdon, Nathan ^a   Zeimer, Ran ^a  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Glaucoma; Macular thickness; Optic disc; Optic nerve; Perimetry

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHM; ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS; ANALYZER; ARTICLE; DISEASE COURSE; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; GLAUCOMA IMAGING LONGITUDINAL STUDY; HEIDELBERG RETINA TOMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; HUMPHREY FIELD ANALYZER II SWEDISH INTERACTIVE THRESHOLD ALGORITHM FAST; IMAGING; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEAN DEVIATION; MEASUREMENT; OPTIC CUP SHAPE MEASURE; OPTIC DISK; OPTIC DISK CUP; OPTIC NERVE INJURY; PATTERN STANDARD DEVIATION; PERIMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETINA INJURY; RETINA MACULA LUTEA; RETINA MACULA THICKNESS; RETINAL THICKNESS ANALYZER; RIM AREA; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; TEST RETEST VARIABILITY; THICKNESS; TOMOGRAPHY; TONOMETER; VARIANCE;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES, OPHTHALMOLOGICAL; DISEASE PROGRESSION; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NERVE FIBERS; OPTIC DISK; OPTIC NERVE DISEASES; PERIMETRY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETINAL GANGLION CELLS; TOMOGRAPHY; VISION DISORDERS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 33646785046     PISSN: 10570829     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00061198-200604000-00012     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Katz J, Congdon N, Friedman DS. Methodological variations in estimating apparent progressive visual field loss in clinical trials of glaucoma treatment. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:1137-1142.
2. Katz J. Scoring systems for measuring progression of visual field loss in clinical trials of glaucoma treatment. Ophthalmology. 1999;106:391-395.
3. Tan JC, Franks WA, Hitchings RA. Interpreting glaucoma progression by white-on-white perimetry. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2002;240:585-592.
4. Katz J, Gilbert D, Quigley HA, et al. Estimating progression of visual field loss in glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 1997;104:1017-1025.
5. Smith SD, Katz J, Quigley HA. Analysis of progressive change in automated visual fields in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1996;37:1419-1428.
6. Spry PG, Johnson CA. Identification of progressive glaucomatous visual field loss. Surv Ophthalmol. 2002;47:158-173.
7. Vesti E, Johnson CA, Chauhan BC. Comparison of different methods for detecting glaucomatous visual field progression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:3873-3879.
8. Haymes SA, Hutchison DM, McCormick TA, et al. Glaucomatous visual field progression with frequency-doubling technology and standard automated perimetry in a longitudinal prospective study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46:547-554.
9. Keltner JL, Johnson CA, Quigg JM, et al. Confirmation of visual field abnormalities in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study. Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study Group. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000;118:1187-1194.
10. Schulzer M. Errors in the diagnosis of visual field progression in normal-tension glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 1994;101:1589-1594.
11. Tan JC, Hitchings RA. Optimizing and validating an approach for identifying glaucomatous change in optic nerve topography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45:1396-1403.
12. Tan JC, Hitchings RA. Approach for identifying glaucomatous optic nerve progression by scanning laser tomography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:2621-2626.
13. Chauhan BC, McCormick TA, Nicolela MT, et al. Optic disc and visual field changes in a prospective longitudinal study of patients with glaucoma: comparison of scanning laser tomography with conventional perimetry and optic disc photography. Arch Ophthalmol. 2001;119:1492-1499.
14. Boehm MD, Nedrud C, Greenfield DS, et al. Scanning laser polarimetry and detection of progression after optic disc hemorrhage in patients with glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003;121:189-194.
15. Hollo G, Szabo A, Vargha P. Scanning laser polarimetry versus frequency-doubling perimetry and conventional threshold perimetry: changes during a 12-month follow-up in preperimetric glaucoma. A pilot study. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2001;79:403-407.
16. Kamal DS, Garway-Heath DF, Hitchings RA, et al. Use of sequential Heidelberg retina tomograph images to identify changes at the optic disc in ocular hypertensive patients at risk of developing glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2000;84:993-998.
17. Anderson DR, Patella VM. Automated Static Perimetry. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 1999.
18. Asrani S, Zou S, d'Anna S, et al. Noninvasive mapping of the normal retinal thickness at the posterior pole. Ophthalmology. 1999;106:269-273.
19. Zeimer R, Shahidi M, Mori M, et al. A new method for rapid mapping of the retinal thickness at the posterior pole. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1996;37:1994-2001.
20. Hopkins WG. Measures of reliability in sports medicine and science. Sports Med. 2000;30:1-15.
21. Armitage P. Statistical Methods in Medical Research. New York: Wiley; 1971.
22. Fleiss JL. The Design and Analysis of Clinical Experiments. New York: Wiley; 1986.
23. Lichter PR, Musch DC, Gillespie BW, et al. Interim clinical outcomes in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study comparing initial treatment randomized to medications or surgery. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:1943-1953.
24. Bengtsson B, Heijl A. SITA Fast, a new rapid perimetric threshold test. Description of methods and evaluation in patients with manifest and suspect glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1998;76: 431-437.
25. Tan JC, Garway-Heath DF, Hitchings RA. Variability across the optic nerve head in scanning laser tomography. Br J Ophthalmol. 2003;87:557-559.
26. Tan JC, Hitchings RA. Reference plane definition and reproducibility in optic nerve head images. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:1132-1137.
27. Browning DJ. Interobserver variability in optical coherence tomography for macular edema. Am J Ophthalmol. 2004;137:1116-1117.
28. Gurses-Ozden R, Teng C, Vessani R, et al. Macular and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness measurement reproducibility using optical coherence tomography (OCT-3). J Glaucoma. 2004;13:238-244.
29. Paunescu LA, Schuman JS, Price LL, et al. Reproducibility of nerve fiber thickness, macular thickness, and optic nerve head measurements using StratusOCT. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45:1716-1724.
30. Neubauer AS, Priglinger S, Ullrich S, et al. Comparison of foveal thickness measured with the retinal thickness analyzer and optical coherence tomography. Retina. 2001;21:596-601.
31. Artes PH, Iwase A, Ohno Y, et al. Properties of perimetric threshold estimates from Full Threshold, SITA Standard, and SITA Fast strategies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43:2654-2659.