The methodology of visual field testing with frequency doubling technology in the national health and nutrition examination survey, 2005-2006

Ophthalmic Epidemiology

Volumn 17, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 411-421

  Terry, Ana L ^a   Paulose Ram, Ryne ^b   Tilert, Timothy J ^a   Johnson, Chris A ^c   Zhang, Xinzhi ^d   Lee, Paul P ^e   Saaddine, Jinan B ^d  

^a NATIONAL CENTER FOR HEALTH STATISTICS   (United States)

^b PFIZER INC   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^d NATIONAL CENTER FOR CHRONIC DISEASE PREVENTION AND HEALTH PROMOTION   (United States)

^e DUKE UNIVERSITY EYE CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

FDT; Frequency doubling technology; Glaucoma; Humphrey Matrix; NHANES; Visual field test

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIABILITY; SCREENING TEST; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HEALTH SURVEYS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NUTRITION SURVEYS; PHOTOGRAPHY; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; UNITED STATES; VISION DISORDERS; VISION SCREENING; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL FIELD TESTS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 78649382591     PISSN: 09286586     EISSN: 17445086     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/09286586.2010.528575     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Gardiner SK, Anderson DR, Fingeret M, McSoley JJ, Johnson C. Evaluation of decision rules for frequency-doubling technology screening tests. Optom Vis Sci. 2006;83:E432-439.
2. 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(7):2451-2457
3. Cioff gA, Mansberger S, Spry PgD, Johnson CA, Van Buskirk EM. Frequency doubling perimetry and the detection of eye disease in the community. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2000;98:199-202.
4. Quigley HA, Sanchez RM, Dunkelburger gR, Henaut NL, Baginski TA. Chronic glaucoma selectively damages large optic nerve fbers. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1987;28:913-918
5. Humphrey® matrix visual feld instrument user's guide, Dublin, CA: Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., 2003.
6. Spry PgD, Johnson CA, Anderson AJ, gunvant P, Fingeret M, Keltner JL, et al. The Humphrey Matrix primer: Preliminary edition. Dublin, CA: Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., 2007.
7. Anderson AJ, Johnson CA, Fingeret M, Keltner JL, Spry PgD, Wall M, et al. Characteristics of the normative database for the Humphrey Matrix perimeter. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46:1540-1548.
8. Hong S, Chung W, Hong YJ, Seong gJ. Discriminating ability of Humphrey matrix perimetry in early glaucoma patients. Ophthalmologica. 2007;221:195-199.
9. Iwasaki A, Sugita M, for the glaucoma Screening Project (gSP) Study group. Performance of glaucoma mass screening with only a visual feld test using frequency-doubling technology perimetry. Am J Ophthalmol. 2002;134:529-537.
10. Anderson AJ, Johnson CA. Frequency doubling technology perimetry. Ophthalmol Clin North Am. 2003;16:213-225.
11. Mansberger SL, Johnson CA, Cioff gA. The results of screening frequency doubling technology perimetry in different locations of the community. J glaucoma. 2007;16:73-80.
12. Spry PgD, Hussin HM, Sparrow JM. Performance of the 24-2-5 frequency doubling technology screening test: a prospective case study. Br J Ophthalmol. 2007;91:1345-1349.
13. Nehmad L, Madonna RJ. Optomizing the use of frequency doubling technology perimetry in community vision screenings. Optom Vis Sci. 2008;85:559-565.
14. Iwase A, Tomidokoro A, Araie M, Shirato S, Shimizu h, Kitazawa Y. Tajimi Study group. Performance of frequency-doubling technology perimetry in a population-based prevalence survey of glaucoma: the Tajimi study. Ophthalmology. 2007;14:27-32.
15. Wang YX, Xu L, Zhang RX, Jonas JB. Frequency-doubling threshold perimetry in predicting glaucoma in a population-based study. Arch Ophthalmol. 2007;125:1402-1406.
16. National Center for Health Statistics. NHANES Analytic guidelines June 2004 Version. September 2006. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/major/ nhanes/nhanes2003-2004/analytical-guidelines.htm. Accessed 29 May 2009.
17. National Center for Health Statistics. Ophthalmology Procedures Manual. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/nhanes-05-06/OP.pdf. Accessed 29 May 2009.
18. Spry Pg, Johnson CA, McKendrick AM, Turpin A. Variability components of standard automated perimetry and frequency-doubling technology perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:1404-1410.
19. Fogagnolo P, Mazzolani F, RossettiL, Orzalesi N. Detecting glaucoma with frequency-doubling technology perimetry: a comparison between N-30 and C-20 screening programs. J glaucoma. 2005;14(6):485-491.
20. Johnson CA, Cioff gA, Van Buskirk EM. Evaluation of two screening tests for frequency doubling technology perimetry. In: Perimetry update 1998/1999. The Hague, The Netherlands: Kugler Publications, 1999:103-9.
21. Wang Q, Klein BEK, Klein R, Moss SE. Refractive status in the Beaver Dam Eye Study. Inves Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1994;35:4344-4347.
22. Ramrattan RS, Wolfs RCW, Panda-Jonas S, Jonas JB, Bakker D, Pols HA, et al. Prevalence and causes of visual feld loss in the elderly and associations with impairment in daily functioning. Arch Ophthalmol. 2001;119:1788-94.
23. Leske MC, Connell AM, Schachat AP, Hyman L. The Barbados Eye Study: prevalence of open angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1994;112:821-829.
24. Varma R, Mohanty SA, Deneen J, Wu J, Azen SP, The LALES group. Burden and predictors of undetected eye disease in Mexican-Americans. Medical Care. 2008;46: 497-506.
25. Chauhan BC, Johnson CA. Test-re-test variability of frequency-doubling perimetry and conventional perimetry in glaucoma patients and normal subjects. Inves Vis Sci. 1999;40:648-656.
26. Patel SC, Friedman DS, Varadkar P, Robin AL. Algorithm for interpreting the results of frequency doubling perimetry. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;129:323-327.
27. Doshi S, Harvey W. Investigative techniques and ocular examination. Elsevier Health Sciences, 2003.