Rarebit perimetry in normal subjects: Test-retest variability, learning effect, normative range, influence of optical defocus, and cataract extraction

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 48, Issue 11, 2007, Pages 5320-5331

  Salvetat, Maria Letizia ^a   Zeppieri, Marco ^a,b   Parisi, Lucia ^a   Brusini, Paolo ^a  

^a SANTA MARIA DELLA MISERICORDIA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF UDINE   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; BLURRED VISION; CATARACT EXTRACTION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEARNING; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; NORMAL VALUE; PERIMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RAREBIT PERIMETRY; REFRACTION ERROR; REPEAT PROCEDURE; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; VISUAL FIELD; CATARACT; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHACOEMULSIFICATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; REFERENCE VALUE; REPRODUCIBILITY; VISUAL DISORDER;

ADULT; AGED; CATARACT; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; LEARNING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PERIMETRY; PHACOEMULSIFICATION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REFERENCE VALUES; REFRACTIVE ERRORS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; VISION DISORDERS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 38449094408     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.06-1495     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Frisén L. New sensitive window on abnormal spatial vision: rarebit probing. Vision Res. 2002;42:1931-1939.
2. Frisén L. Spatial vision in visually asymptomatic subjects at high risk for multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2003;74:1145-1147.
3. Brusini P, Salvetat ML, Parisi L, Zeppieri M. Probing glaucoma visual damage by rarebit perimetry. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005;89:180-184.
4. Martin L, Wanger P. New perimetric techniques: a comparison between rarebit and frequency doubling technology perimetry in normal subjects and glaucoma patients. J Glaucoma. 2004;13:268-272.
5. Frisén L. Closing perimetry's gap: a rarebit approach. In: Henson DB, Wall M, eds. Perimetry Update 2002/2003. The Hague, The Netherlands: Kugler Publications; 2004:213-219.
6. Katz J, Sommer A, Witt K. Reliability of visual field results over repeated testings. Ophthalmology. 1991;98:70-75.
7. Heijl A, Lindgren G, Olsson J. The effect of perimetric experience in normal subjects. Arch Ophthalmol. 1989;107:81-86.
8. Wild JM, Kim LS, Pacey IE, et al. Evidence for a learning effect in short-wavelength automated perimetry. Ophthalmology. 2006;113:206-215.
9. Joson PJ, Kamantigue MEG, Chen PP. Learning effects among perimetric novices in frequency doubling technology perimetry. Ophthalmology. 2002;109:757-760.
10. Hodapp E, Parrish RK, Anderson DR. Clinical Decisions in Glaucoma. St. Louis: CV Mosby; 1993:52-61.
11. Flammer J. The concept of visual field indices. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1986;224:389-392.
12. Spry PGD, Johnson CA. Identification of progressive glaucomatous visual field loss. Surv Ophthalmol. 2002;47:158-173.
13. Spry PGD, Henson DB, Sparrow JM, North RV. Quantitative comparison of static perimetric strategies in early glaucoma: test-retest variability. J Glaucoma. 2000;9:247-253.
14. 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;40:648-656.
15. 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.
16. Goldstick BJ, Weinreb RN. The effect of refractive error on automated global analysis program G-1. Am J Ophthalmol. 1987;104:229-232.
17. Artes PH, Nicolela MT, McCormick TA, et al. Effects of blur and repeated testing on sensitivity estimate with frequency doubling technology. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:646-652.
18. Lam BL, Alward WL, Kolder HE. Effect of cataract on automated perimetry. Ophthalmology. 1991;98:1066-1070.
19. The AGIS Investigators. The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study. 6. Effect of cataract on visual field and visual acuity. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000;118:1639-1652.
20. Frisén L. High-pass resolution perimetry; central-field neuroretinal correlates. Vision Res. 1995;35:293-301.
21. Bailey IL, Lovie JE. New design principles for visual acuity letter charts. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1976;53:740-745.
22. Chylack LT Jr, Wolfe JK, Singer DM, et al. The Lens Opacities Classification System III. The longitudinal study of cataract study group. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993;111:831-836.
23. Curcio CA, Allen KA. Topography of ganglion cells in human retina. J Comp Neurol. 1990;300:5-25.
24. Frisén L. High-pass resolution perimetry and age-related loss of visual pathway neurons. Acta Ophthalmol. 1991;69:511-515.
25. Schiefer U, Benda N, Dietrich TJ, et al. Angioscotomata detection with fundus-oriented perimetry: a study with dark and bright stimuli of different sizes. Vision Res. 1997;39:1897-1909.
26. Kurimoto Y, Matsuno K, Umihira J, Yoshimura N. Asymmetries of the retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in normal eyes. Br J Ophthalmol. 2000;84:469-472.
27. Spry PG, Johnson CA. Senescent changes of the normal visual field: an age-old problem. Optom Vis Sci. 2001;78:436-441.
28. Gardiner SK, Johnson CA, Spry PGD. Normal age-related sensitivity loss for a variety of visual functions throughout the visual field. Optom Vis Sci. 2006;83:438-443.
29. Frisén L. High-pass resolution perimetry and age-related loss of visual pathway neurons. Acta Ophthalmol. 1991;69:511-515.
30. Whitaker D, Elliott DB. Simulating age-related optical changes in the human eye. Doc Ophthalmol. 1992;82:307-316.
31. Kuroda T, Fujikado T, Ninomiya S, Maeda N, Hirohara Y, Mihashi T. Effect of aging on ocular light scatter and higher order aberrations. J Refract Surg. 2002;18:S598-S602.
32. Hennelly ML, Barbur JL, Edgar DF, Woodward EG. The effect of age on the light scattering characteristics of the eye. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1998;18:197-203.
33. Shahidi M, Yang Y. Measurements of ocular aberrations and light scatter in healthy subjects. Optom Vis Sci. 2004;81:853-857.
34. Jonas JB, Müller-Bergh A, Schlötzer-Schrehardt UM, Naumann GO. Histomorphometry of the human optic nerve. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1990;31:736-744.
35. Da Pozzo S, Iacono P, Marchesan R, Minutola D, Ravalico G. The effect of ageing on retinal nerve fibre layer thickness; an evaluation by scanning laser polarimetry with variable corneal compensation Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2006;84:375-379.
36. Heijl A, Bengtsson B. The effect of perimetric experience in patients with glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1996;114:19-22.
37. Gillespie BW, Musch DC, Guire KE, et al. The collaborative initial glaucoma treatment study: baseline visual field and test-retest variability. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;4:2613-2620.
38. Iester M, Capris P, Pandolfo A, et al. Learning effect, short-term fluctuation, and long-term fluctuation in frequency doubling technology. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;130:160-164.
39. Wilensky JT, Joondeph BC. Variation in visual field measurements with an automated perimeter. Am J Ophthalmol. 1984;97:328-331.
40. Katz J, Sommer A. A longitudinal study of the age-adjusted variability of automated visual fields. Arch Ophthalmol. 1978;105:1083-1086.
41. Lindenmuth KA, Skuta GL, Rabbani R, et al. Effects of pupillary dilation on automated perimetry in normal patients. Ophthalmology. 1990;97:367-370.
42. Blumenthal EZ, Sample PA, Berry CC, et al. Evaluating several sources of variability for standard and SWAP visual fields in glaucoma patients, suspects, and normals. Ophthalmology. 2003;110:1895-1902.
43. Heijl A, Lindgren A, Lindgren G. Test-retest variability in glaucomatous visual fields. Am J Ophthalmol. 1989;108:130-135.
44. Spry PGD, Johnson CA, McKendrick AM, Turpin A. Variability components of standard perimetry and frequency-doubling technology perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:1404-1410.
45. Wall M, Lefante J, Conway M. Variability of high-pass resolution perimetry in normals and patients with idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1991;32:3091-3095.
46. Anderson RS, McDowell DR, Ennis FA. Effect of localized defocus on detection threshold for different sized targets in the fovea and periphery. Acta Ophthalmol. 2001;79:60-63.
47. Mutlukan E. The effect of refractive blur on the detection sensitivity to light offsets in the central visual field. Acta Ophthalmol. 1994;72:189-194.
48. Atchison DA. Effect of defocus on visual field measurements. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1987;7:259-265.
49. Anderson AJ, Johnson CA. Frequency-doubling technology perimetry and optical defocus. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:4147-4152.
50. Thibos L, Hong X, Bradley A. Accuracy and precision of objective refraction from wavefront aberrations. J Vision. 2004;4:329-351.
51. Glasser A, Campbell MCW. Biometrie, optical and physical changes in the isolated human crystalline lens with age in relation to presbyopia. Vision Res. 1999;39:1991-2015.
52. Winn B, Whitaker D, Elliot DB, et al. Factors affecting light-adapted pupil size in normal human subjects. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1994;35:1132-1137.
53. Woods RL, Bradley A, Atchison DA. Monocular diplopia caused by ocular aberrations and hyperopic defocus. Vision Res. 1996;36:3597-3606.
54. Costello MJ, Johnsen S, Gilliland KO, Freel CD, Fowler WC. Predicted light scattering from particles observed in human age-related nuclear cataracts using mie scattering theory. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48:303-312.
55. Lasa MS, Datiles MB 3rd, Podgor MJ, Magno BV. Contrast and glare sensitivity: association with the type and severity of the cataract. Ophthalmology. 1992;99:1045-1049.
56. De Waard PW, IJspeert JK, van den Berg TJ, de Jong PT. Intraocular light scattering in age-related cataracts. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1992;33:618-625.
57. Smith SD, Katz J, Quigley HA. Effect of cataract extraction on the results of automated fields in chronic open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1995;113:875-879.
58. Hayashi K, Hayashi H, Nakao F, Hayashi F. Influence of cataract surgery on automated perimetry in patients with glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 2001;132:41-46.
59. Moss ID, Wild JM, Whitacre DJ. The influence of age-related cataract on blue-on-yellow perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1995;36:764-773.
60. Kim YY, Kim JS, Shin DH, et al. Effect of cataract extraction on blue-on-yellow visual field. Am J Ophthalmol. 2001;132:217-220.
61. Kook MS, Yang SJ, Kim S, et al. Effect of cataract extraction on frequency doubling technology perimetry. Am J Ophthalmol. 2004;138:85-90.
62. Tanna AP, Abraham C, Lai J, Shen J. Impact of cataract on the results of frequency-doubling technology perimetry. Ophthalmology. 2004;111:1504-1507.
63. Martin L. Cataract and high-pass resolution perimetry. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1997;75:174-177.
64. Chen PP, Budenz DL. The effect of cataract extraction on the visual field of eyes with chronic open-angle glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 1998;125:325-333.
65. Wood JM, Wild JM, Smerdon DL, Crews SJ. Alterations in the shape of the automated perimetric profile arising from cataract. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1989;227:157-161.