论文部分内容阅读
Objective:To evaluate whether the order of eye testing affects the mean deviation(MD) or the test reliability of visual field testing using the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm(SITA) standard 24-2.Methods:Consecutive patients with manifest or suspect glaucoma with 2 prior sets of SITA standard 24-2 test results performed on the right eye first were enrolled.A subsequent test was performed on the left eye first.For each eye,the MD and the test reliability indexes(≥ 20%) -were compared among the 3 successive examinations.Results:Forty-seven patients(29 women and 18 men;mean± SD age,70.6± 11.9 years) were enrolled.The MD± SD was-5.83± 5.43 dB OD and-5.46± 4.86 dB OS.There was no statistically significant difference in the MD or the test reliability among the 3 test results for either eye.Fixation loss was responsible for the unreliable fields in almost all cases.Conclusions:Among this cohort of patients experienced with automated perimetry in a glaucoma subspecialty practice,changing the order of eye testing using the SITA standard 24-2 did not have a signifi-cant effect on the MD or the test reliability.Intereye fatigue may not be clinically significant with this algorithm.Fixation loss remains a problem with the use of this algorithm.
Objective: To evaluate whether the order of eye testing affects the mean deviation (MD) or the test reliability of visual field testing using the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) standard 24-2. Methods: Consecutive patients with manifest or suspect glaucoma with 2 prior sets of SITA standard 24-2 test results performed on the right eye first were enrolled. A subsequent test was performed on the left eye first. For each eye, the MD and the test reliability indexes (≥ 20%) -were contest among the 3 successive examinations. Results: Forty-seven patients (29 women and 18 men; mean ± SD age, 70.6 ± 11.9 years) were enrolled. MD ± SD was-5.83 ± 5.43 dB OD and-5.46 ± 4.86 dB OS. There was no statistically significant difference in the MD or the test reliability among the 3 test results for either eye. Fixation loss was responsible for the unreliable fields in almost all cases. Conclusions: Among this cohort of patients experienced with automated perimetry in a glaucoma subspecialty practice , changing the order of eye testing using the SITA standard 24-2 did not have a signifi-cant effect on the MD or the test reliability. Yetreye fatigue may not be clinically significant with this algorithm. Fibation loss remains a problem with the use of this algorithm.