The performance of iPad-based noise-field perimeter versus Humphrey Field Analyser in detecting glaucomatous visual field loss.

Autor: Ding J; Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.; Department of Ophthalmology, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, Singapore., Tecson IC; Department of Ophthalmology, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.; Department of Ophthalmology, Cardinal Santos Medical Centre, Manila, Philippines., Ang BCH; Department of Ophthalmology, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, Singapore., Chiew W; Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore., Chua C; Department of Ophthalmology, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, Singapore., Yip LWL; Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore. leonard_yip@ttsh.com.sg.; Department of Ophthalmology, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. leonard_yip@ttsh.com.sg.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Eye (London, England) [Eye (Lond)] 2022 Apr; Vol. 36 (4), pp. 800-811. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Apr 20.
DOI: 10.1038/s41433-021-01541-x
Abstrakt: Background: To conduct a preliminary evaluation of the feasibility of visual field fast (VFF), a free iPad-based noise-field perimeter, in detecting glaucomatous scotomas versus the clinical-standard Humphrey visual field (HVF) test. VFF confronts subjects with a screen of flickering stimulus, allowing the immediate perception of scotomas.
Methods: This was a cross-sectional observational study of 66 glaucoma patients (66 eyes) and 30 healthy controls (30 eyes). All patients had no other visual field disorders. VFF was compared against HVF in terms of whole field and quadrants for the following: (1) correspondence in scotoma detection. (2) Agreement and correlation of the scotoma size (percentage of abnormal visual field area). (3) Test duration. Other domains tested included: (1) correlation of VFF scotoma area with the severity of visual field loss on HVF (mean deviation, MD; visual field index, VFI). (2) Repeatability of VFF. (3) Patient descriptors of scotomas.
Results: Using HVF pattern deviation plot as a reference, VFF detected 52/57 (91.2%) of glaucoma subjects with 1 false-positive (control) (kappa = 0.86). 146/184 (79.3%) of abnormal quadrants (visual field defect present) were localized and 23/157 (14.6%) healthy quadrants were falsely identified as abnormal (kappa = 0.61). VFF underestimated scotoma area as compared to HVF (21.0% versus 44.0%, p < 0.01) but correlated positively (r = 0.268, p = 0.044) with HVF area and negatively with VFI (r = -0.340, p = 0.01) and MD (r = -0.398, p < 0.01). Using HVF total deviation plot as reference, VFF's glaucoma detection rate remained unchanged (kappa = 0.86) with similar quadrant detection (kappa = 0.68). However, a greater underestimation of scotoma area was observed (21.0% versus 85.4%, p < 0.01). VFF's quantitative repeatability was excellent for whole field (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC: 0.96; p < 0.0001) and quadrants (ICC: 0.82-0.96; all p < 0.001). Qualitatively, 35/37 (94.6%) of subjects reported reduced luminance and flicker in scotomas, with similar morphologies on retests. VFF is faster than HVF SITA-Standard in glaucoma (3.60 ± 1.85 min versus 6.92 ± 1.12 min, p < 0.01) and control (1.12 ± 0.486 min versus 5.16 ± 0.727 min, p < 0.01).
Conclusion: This early model of VFF accurately detected scotomas with high repeatability. However, its accuracy in localizing and quantifying the scotoma can be improved. Considering its portability and cost-effectiveness, VFF demonstrated potential as a general screening tool for moderate-to-severe glaucoma.
(© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Royal College of Ophthalmologists.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: