Glaucoma monitoring in a clinical setting: Glaucoma progression analysis vs nonparametric progression analysis in the Groningen longitudinal glaucoma study

Archives of Ophthalmology

Volumn 127, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 270-274

  Wesselink, Christiaan ^a   Heeg, Govert P ^a   Jansonius, Nomdo M ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^b ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGED; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; DISEASE COURSE; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MONITORING; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; PERIMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; VISUAL FIELD DEFECT;

AGED; ALGORITHMS; AXONS; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MALE; PERIMETRY; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RETINAL GANGLION CELLS; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; VISION DISORDERS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 62449161809     PISSN: 00039950     EISSN: 15383601     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/archophthalmol.2008.585     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Maier PC, Funk J, Schwarzer G, Antes G, Falck-Ytter YT. Treatment of ocular hypertension and open angle glaucoma: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2005;331(7509):e134. http://www.pubmedcentral. nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=15994659. Accessed November 16, 2008.
2. Spry PG, Johnson CA. Identification of progressive glaucomatous visual field loss. Surv Ophthalmol. 2002;47(2):158-173.
3. Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study Investigators. Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study, 2: visual field test scoring and reliability. Ophthalmology. 1994;101(8):1445-1455.
4. Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA, Poinoosawmy D, McNaught AI, Crabb DP. Analysis of visual field progression in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 1996;80(1):40-48.
5. Heijl A, Lindgren G, Lindgren A, et al. Extended empirical statistical package for evaluation of single and multiple fields in glaucoma: StatPac 2. In: Mills RP, Heijl A, eds. Perimetry Update 1990/1. New York, NY: Kugler Publications; 1990:305-315.
6. Leske MC, Heijl A, Hyman L, Bengtsson B. Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial: design and baseline data. Ophthalmology. 1999;106(11):2144-2153.
7. Musch DC, Lichter PR, Guire KE, Standardi CL. The Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study: study design, methods, and baseline characteristics of enrolled patients. Ophthalmology. 1999;106(4):653-662.
8. Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study Investigators. The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS), 7: the relationship between control of intraocular pressure and visual field deterioration. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;130(4):429-440.
9. Heijl A, Leske MC, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Bengtsson B, Hussein M; Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial Group. Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression: results from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120(10):1268-1279.
10. Bengtsson B, Lindgren A, Heijl A, Lindgren G, Asman P, Patella M. Perimetric probability maps to separate change caused by glaucoma from that caused by cataract. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1997;75(2):184-188.
11. Lam BL, Alward WL, Kolder HE. Effect of cataract on automated perimetry. Ophthalmology. 1991;98(7):1066-1070.
12. Artes PH, Nicolela MT, LeBlanc RP, Chauhan BC. Visual field progression in glaucoma: total versus pattern deviation analyses. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46(12):4600-4606.
13. Viswanathan AC, Crabb DP, McNaught AI, et al. Interobserver agreement on visual field progression in glaucoma: a comparison of methods. Br J Ophthalmol. 2003;87(6):726-730.
14. Werner EB, Bishop KI, Koelle J, et al. A comparison of experienced clinical observers and statistical tests in detection of progressive visual field loss in glaucoma using automated perimetry. Arch Ophthalmol. 1988;106(5):619-623.
15. Jansonius NM. Bayes' theorem applied to perimetric progression detection in glaucoma: from specificity to positive predictive value. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2005;243(5):433-437.
16. Heeg GP, Blanksma LJ, Hardus PL, Jansonius NM. The Groningen Longitudinal Glaucoma Study, I: baseline sensitivity and specificity of the frequency doubling perimeter and the GDx nerve fibre analyser. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2005;83(1):46-52.
17. Katz J, Sommer A, Gaasterland DE, Anderson DR. Comparison of analytic algorithms for detecting glaucomatous visual field loss. Arch Ophthalmol. 1991;109(12):1684-1689.
18. Heijl A, Leske MC, Bengtsson B, Bengtsson B, Hussein M; Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial Group. Measuring visual field progression in the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2003;81(3):286-293.
19. Heijl A, Bengtsson B, Chauhan BC, et al. A comparison of visual field progression criteria of 3 major glaucoma trials in early manifest glaucoma trial patients. Ophthalmology. 2008;115(9):1557-1565.
20. 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(9):1137-1142.
21. Lee AC, Sample PA, Blumenthal EZ, Berry C, Zangwill L, Weinreb RN. Infrequent confirmation of visual field progression. Ophthalmology. 2002;109(6):1059-1065.
22. Nouri-Mahdavi K, Hoffman D, Ralli M, Caprioli J. Comparison of methods to predict visual field progression in glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2007;125(9):1176-1181.
23. Vesti E, Johnson CA, Chauhan BC. Comparison of different methods for detecting glaucomatous visual field progression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44(9):3873-3879.
24. Budenz DL, Rhee P, Feuer WJ, McSoley J, Johnson CA, Anderson DR. Sensitivity and specificity of the Swedish interactive threshold algorithm for glaucomatous visual field defects. Ophthalmology. 2002;109(6):1052-1058.
25. Delgado MF, Nguyen NT, Cox TA, et al; American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmic Technology Assessment Committee 2001-2002 Glaucoma Panel. Automated perimetry: a report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology. 2002;109(12):2362-2374.
26. Pierre-Filho PT, Schimiti RB, de Vasconcellos JP, Costa VP. Sensitivity and specificity of frequency-doubling technology, tendency-oriented perimetry, SITA Standard and SITA Fast perimetry in perimetrically inexperienced individuals. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2006;84(3):345-350.
27. Artes PH, Iwase A, Ohno Y, Kitazawa Y, Chauhan BC. Properties of perimetric threshold estimates from Full Threshold, SITA Standard, and SITA Fast strategies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43(8):2654-2659.
28. Efron B. The Jackknife, the Bootstrap, and Other Resampling Plans. Philadelphia, PA: SIAM Books; 1982.