Mean deviation fluctuation in eyes with stable Humphrey 24-2 visual fields

Eye

Volumn 21, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 362-366

  Tattersall, C L ^a   Vernon, S A ^a   Menon, G J ^a  

^a QUEEN S MEDICAL CENTRE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DISEASE COURSE; DISEASE SEVERITY; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; RELIABILITY; SCORING SYSTEM; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL FIELD DEFECT; VISUAL SYSTEM EXAMINATION;

EID: 33847617407     PISSN: 0950222X     EISSN: 14765454     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/sj.eye.6702206     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Heijl A, Asman P. Pitfalls of automated perimetry in glaucoma diagnosis. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 1995; 6(2): 46-51.
2. Hutchings N, Wild J, Hussey M, Flanagan J, Trope G. The long-term fluctuation of the visual field in stable glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2000; 41(11): 3429-3436.
3. Stewart W, Kelly D, Hunt H. Long-term and short-term fluctuation in pattern discrimination perimetry. Am J Ophthalmol 1992; 114(3): 302-306.
4. Hoskins H, Magee S, Drake M, Kidd M. Confidence intervals for change in automated visual fields. Br J Ophthalmol 1988; 72(8): 591-597.
5. Flammer J, Drance S, Zulauf M. Short and long-term fluctuation in patients with glaucoma, normal controls and patients with suspected glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 1984; 102: 704-706.
6. Boeglin R, Caprioli J, Zulauf M. Long-term fluctuation of the visual field in glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 1992; 113(4): 396-400.
7. Hitchings R. Fundamentals of Clinical Ophthalmology, Glaucoma. BMJ: London, 2000, p 117.
8. Viswanathan A, Fitzke F, Hitchings R. Early detection of visual field progression in glaucoma: A comparison of PROGRESSOR and STATPAC 2. Br J Ophthalmol 1997; 81: 1037-1042.
9. Gaasterland D, Ederer F, Sullivan K, Caprioli J, Cyrlin M. Advanced glaucoma intervention study 2 visual field test scoring and reliability. Ophthalmology 1994; 101(8): 1445-1455.
10. Vingrys A, Demirel S. False-response monitoring during automated perimetry. Optom Vis Sci 1998; 75(7): 513-517.
11. Haley M. The Field Analyzer Primer, 2nd ed. Allergan: California, 1987, p 134.
12. Henson D. Visual Fields. Butterworth Heeineman: Oxford, 2000, p 126.
13. Heijl A, Bengtsson B. The effect of perimetric experience in patients with glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 1996; 114(1): 19-22.
14. Kulze J, Stewart W, Sutherland S. Factors associated with a learning effect in glaucoma patients using automated perimetry. Acta Ophthalmol 1990; 68(6): 681-686.
15. Budenz D, Rhee P, Feuer W, McSoley J, Johnson C, Anderson D. Comparison of glaucomatous visual field defects using standard full threshold and Swedish interactive threshold algorithms. Arch Ophthalmol 2002; 120(9): 1136-1141.
16. Sekhar G, Naduvilath T, Lakkai M, Jayakumar A, Pandi G, Mandal A et al. Sensitivity of Swedish interactive threshold algorithm compared with standard full threshold algorithm in Humphrey visual field testing. Ophthalmology 2000; 107(7): 1303-1308.
17. Wild J, Pacey I, O'Neill E, Cunliffe I. The SITA perimetric threshold algorithms in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1999; 40(9): 1998-2009.
18. Bengtsson B, Heijl A. Evaluation of a new perimetric threshold strategy, SITA, in patients with manifest and suspect glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1998; 76(3): 268-272.
19. Budenz D, Rhee P, Feuer W, McSoley J, Johnson C, Anderson D. Sensitivity and specificity of the Swedish interactive threshold algorithm for glaucomatous visual field defects. Ophthalmology 2002; 109(6): 1052-1058.
20. Wild J, Pacey I, Hancock S, Cunliffe I. Between-algorithm, between-individual differences in normal perimetric sensitivity: Full threshold, FASTPAC, and SITA. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1999; 40(6): 1152-1161.
21. Bengtsson B, Heijl A. Comparing significance and magnitude of glaucomatous visual field defects using the SITA and Full Threshold strategies. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1999; 77(2): 143-146.
22. Artes P, Iwase A, Ohno Y, Kitazawa Y, Chauhan B. Properties of perimetric threshold estimates from Full Threshold, SITA Standard, and SITA Fast strategies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002; 43(8): 2654-2659.
23. O'Brien C, Poinoosawmy D, Wu J, Hitchings R. Evaluation of the Humphrey Fastpac threshold program in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 1994; 78(7): 513-514.
24. Gurwitz J, glynn R, Monane M, Everitt D, Gilden D, Smith N et al. Treatment for glaucoma: Adherence by the elderly. Am J Pub Health 1993; 83(5): 711-716.
25. Tsai J, McClure C, Ramos S, Schlundt D, Pichert J. Compliance barriers in glaucoma: A systematic classification. J Glaucoma 2003; 12(5): 393-398.
26. Schulzer M. Errors in the diagnosis of visual field progression in normal-tension glaucoma. Ophthalmology 1994; 101(9): 1589-1594.