Comparison of 24-2 and 30-2 perimetry in glaucomatous and nonglaucomatous optic neuropathies

Journal of Neuro-Ophthalmology

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 100-108

  Khoury, Johnny M ^a   Donahue, Sean P ^a   Lavin, Patrick J M ^a   Tsai, James C ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Automated perimetry; Glaucoma; Optic neuropathy; Visual field

Indexed keywords

EID: 84975486927     PISSN: 10708022     EISSN: 15365166     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00041327-199906000-00004     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Parrish RK, Schiffman J, Anderson DR. Static and kinetic visual field testing. Reproducibility in normal volunteers. Arch Ophthalmol 1984;102: 1497-502.
2. Heijl A, Lindgren G, Olsson J. Normal variability of static perimetric threshold values across the central visual field. Arch Ophthalmol 1987;105: 1544-9.
3. Heijl A, Lindgren A, Lindgren G. Test-retest variability in glaucomatous visual fields. Am J Ophthalmol 1989;108: 130-5.
4. Haefliger IO, Flammer J. Fluctuation of the differential light threshold at the border of absolute scotomas. Comparison between glaucomatous visual field defects and blind spots. Ophthalmology 1991;98: 1529-32.
5. Schaumberger M, Schafer B, Lachenmayr BJ. Glaucomatous Field Fields. FASTPAC versus full threshold strategy of the Humphrey Field Analyzer. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1995;36: 1390-7.
6. Flanagan JG, Wild JM, Trope GE. Evaluation of FASTPAC, a new strategy for threshold estimation with the Humphrey Field Analyzer, in a glaucomatous population. Ophthalmology 100: 949-54.
7. Mills RP, Barnebey HW, Migliazzo CV, Li Y. Does saving time using FASTPAC or suprathreshold testing reduce quality of visual fields? Ophthalmology 1994;101: 1596-603.
8. Searle AET, Wild JM, Shaw DE, O’Neill EC. Time-related variation in normal automated static perimetry. Ophthalmology 1991;98: 701-7.
9. Heijl A, Drance SM. Changes in differential threshold in patients with glaucoma during prolonged perimetry. Br J Ophthalmol 1983;67: 512-6.
10. Johnson CA, Adams CW, Lewis RA. Fatigue effects in automated perimetry. Appl Opt 1988;27: 1030-7.
11. Langerhorst CT, Van Den Berg TJTP, Veldman E, Greve EL. Population study of global and local fatigue with prolonged threshold testing in automated perimetry. In: Heijl A, Greve EL, eds. Seventh International Visual Field Symposium. Dordrecht: Marti-nus Nijhoff/Dr. W. Junk, 1987;657-62.
12. Heijl A, Lindgren G, Olsson J. The effect of perimetric experience in normal subjects. Arch Ophthalmol 1989;107: 81-6.
13. Hudson C, Wild JM, O’Neill EC. Fatigue effects during a single session of automated static threshold perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1994;35: 268-80.