Normal age-related sensitivity loss for a variety of visual functions throughout the visual field

Optometry and Vision Science

Volumn 83, Issue 7, 2006, Pages 438-443

  Gardiner, Stuart K ^a   Johnson, Chris A ^a   Spry, Paul G D ^b  

^a DEVERS EYE INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Aging; Glaucoma; Perimetry; Preferential psychophysical tests; Variability

Indexed keywords

DISEASES; MEDICAL APPLICATIONS; PHYSIOLOGY; VISION;

AGING; GLAUCOMA; PERIMETRY; PREFERENTIAL PSYCHOPHYSICAL TESTS; VARIABILITY;

PATIENT TREATMENT;

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; DETECTION ACUITY PERIMETRY; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; FREQUENCY DOUBLING TECHNOLOGY PERIMETRY; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; NORMAL HUMAN; PERIMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESOLUTION ACUITY PERIMETRY; SHORT WAVELENGTH AUTOMATED PERIMETRY; STANDARD AUTOMATED PERIMETRY; TEMPORAL MODULATION PERIMETRY; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AGING; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PERIMETRY; PROGNOSIS; REFERENCE VALUES; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 33746589098     PISSN: 10405488     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.opx.0000225108.13284.fc     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Spear PD. Neural bases of visual deficits during aging. Vision Res 1993;33:2589-609.
2. Steinman SB, Steinman BA, Trick GL, Lehmkuhle S. A sensory explanation for visual attention deficits in the elderly. Optom Vis Sci 1994;71:743-9.
3. Heijl A, Lindgren G, Olsson J. Normal variability of static perimetric threshold values across the central visual field. Arch Ophthalmol 1987;105:1544-9.
4. Wild JM, Cubbidge RP, Pacey IE, Robinson R. Statistical aspects of the normal visual field in short-wavelength automated perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1998;39:54-63.
5. Johnson CA, Adams AJ, Twelker JD, Quigg JM. Age-related changes in the central visual field for short-wavelength-sensitive pathways. J Opt Soc Am (A) 1988;5:2131-9.
6. Casson EJ, Johnson CA, Nelson-Quigg JM. Temporal modulation perimetry: the effects of aging and eccentricity on sensitivity in normals. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1993;34:3096-102.
7. Lachenmayr BJ, Kojetinsky S, Ostermaier N, Angstwurm K, Vivell PM, Schaumberger M. The different effects of aging on normal sensitivity in flicker and light-sense perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1994;35:2741-8.
8. Adams CW, Bullimore MA, Wall M, Fingeret M, Johnson CA. Normal aging effects for frequency doubling technology perimetry. Optom Vis Sci 1999;76:582-7.
9. Demirel S, Thibos L, Johnson CA. Age and eccentricity effects on grating detection and grating resolution automated perimetry. In: Wall, M, Wild JM, eds. Perimetry Update 1998/1999: Proceedings of the XIIIth International Perimetric Society Meeting; Gardone Riviera (BS), Italy; September 6-9, 1998. The Hague: Kugler; 1999: 229-39.
10. Artes PH, Hutchison DM, Nicolela MT, LeBlanc RP, Chauhan BC. Threshold and variability properties of matrix frequency-doubling technology and standard automated perimetry in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2005;46:2451-7.
11. Chauhan BC, Johnson CA. Test-retest variability of frequency-doubling perimetry and conventional perimetry in glaucoma patients and normal subjects. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1999;40:648-56.
12. Spry PG, Johnson CA, McKendrick AM, Turpin A. Variability components of standard automated perimetry and frequency-doubling technology perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2001;42:1404-10.
13. Hutchings N, Hosking SL, Wild JM, Flanagan JG. Long-term fluctuation in short-wavelength automated perimetry in glaucoma suspects and glaucoma patients. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2001;42:2332-7.
14. Kwon YH, Park HJ, Jap A, Ugurlu S, Caprioli J. Test-retest variability of blue-on-yellow perimetry is greater than white-on-white perimetry in normal subjects. Am J Ophthalmol 1998;126:29-36.
15. Joson PJ, Kamantigue ME, Chen PP. Learning effects among perimetric novices in frequency doubling technology perimetry. Ophthalmology 2002;109:757-60.
16. Fujimoto N, Minowa K, Miyauchi O, Hanawa T, Adachi-Usami E. Learning effect for frequency doubling perimetry in patients with glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 2002;133:269-70.
17. Wild JM, Dengler-Harles M, Searle AE, O'Neill EC, Crews SJ. The influence of the learning effect on automated perimetry in patients with suspected glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1989;67:537-45.
18. Johnson CA. Selective versus nonselective losses in glaucoma. J Glaucoma 1994;3:S32-S44.
19. Sample PA, Bosworth CF, Blumenthal EZ, Girkin C, Weinreb RN. Visual function-specific perimetry for indirect comparison of different ganglion cell populations in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2000;41:1783-90.
20. Martin PR, White AJ, Goodchild AK, Wilder HD, Sefton AE. Evidence that blue-on cells are part of the third geniculocortical pathway in primates. Eur J Neurosci 1997;9:1536-41.
21. Spry PG, Johnson CA, Mansberger SL, Cioffi GA. Psychophysical investigation of ganglion cell loss in early glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2005;14:11-9.
22. Johnson CA, Adams AJ, Casson EJ, Brandt JD. Blue-on-yellow perimetry can predict the development of glaucomatous visual field loss. Arch Ophthalmol 1993;111:645-50.
23. Johnson CA, Cioffi GA, Van Buskirk EM. Frequency doubling technology perimetry using a 24-2 stimulus presentation pattern. Optom Vis Sci 1999;76:571-81.
24. Harwerth RS, Smith 3rd, EL DeSantis L. Mechanisms mediating visual detection in static perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1993;34:3011-23.
25. Hitchings RA. Selective ganglion cell death in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 2000;84:678-9.
26. Anderson D, Patella V. Automated Static Perimetry, 2nd ed. St. Louis: Mosby;1999:147-59.
27. Bebie H, Fankhauser F, Spahr J. Static perimetry: strategies. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1976;54:325-38.
28. Sample PA, Johnson CA, Haegerstrom-Portnoy Adams AJ. Optimum parameters for short-wavelength automated perimetry. J Glaucoma 1996;5:375-83.
29. Casson EJ, Johnson CA, Shapiro LR. Longitudinal comparison of temporal-modulation perimetry with white-on-white and blue-on-yellow perimetry in ocular hypertension and early glaucoma. J Opt Soc Am (A) 1993;10:1792-806.
30. Tyrell R, Owens D. A rapid technique to assess the resting states of the eyes and other threshold phenomena: the modified binary search (MOBS). Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 1988;20:137-41.
31. Perneger TV. What's wrong with Bonferroni adjustments. BMJ 1998;316:1236-8.
32. Wall M, Kutzko KE, Chauhan BC. Variability in patients with glaucomatous visual field damage is reduced using size V stimuli. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1997;38:426-35.
33. King-Smith PE, Grigsby SS, Vingrys AJ, Benes SC, Supowit A. Efficient and unbiased modifications of the QUEST threshold method: theory, simulations, experimental evaluation and practical implementation. Vision Res 1994;34:885-912.
34. Turpin A, McKendrick AM, Johnson CA, Vingrys AJ. Performance of efficient test procedures for frequency-doubling technology perimetry in normal and glaucomatous eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43:709-15.
35. Turpin A, Johnson CA, Spry PG. Development of a maximum likelihood procedure for short-wavelength automated perimetry. In: Wall, M, Mills RP, eds. Perimetry Update 2000/2001: Proceedings of the XIVth International Perimetric Society Meeting; Halifax, Canada; September 6-9, 2000. The Hague: Kugler;2000:139-47.
36. McKendrick AM, Anderson AJ, Johnson CA, Fortune B. Appearance of the frequency doubling stimulus in normal subjects and patients with glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44:1111-6.
37. Thibos LN, Still DL, Bradley A. Characterization of spatial aliasing and contrast sensitivity in peripheral vision. Vision Res 1996;36:249-58.