Abstract
Interpretation of a single field printout in a correct sequence is helpful in clinical practice. Identification of the patient, date of birth, selection of same program and strategy, checking the reliability factors, blind spot and pupil size before embarking on the raw data and total and pattern deviation will ensure a proper diagnosis with a resultant decrease in errors. Each zone in the printout has some bearing on the other, and each must be examined and correlated to arrive at a correct diagnosis. Understanding each part of the field will help in the interpretation of the printout.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Kahook MY, Noecker RJ. How do you interpret a 24-2 humphrey visual field printout? Glaucoma Today. 2020. Available from https://glaucomatoday.com/articles/2007-nov-dec/GT1107_10-php.
Racette L, Fischer M, Bebie H, Hollo G, Johnson CA, Matsumoto C. External obstructions blocking stimuli from reaching the retina. In: AG H-S, editor. Visual field digest: a guide to perimetry and the octopus perimeter. 6th ed. Koniz, Switzerland: Haag-Striet AG; 2016. p. 44.
Salem DG, Mourad MS, Hamid MA. The effect of pupillary dilatation on visual field testing in glaucoma. J Egypt Ophthalmol Soc. 2020;113:54–68.
Phu J, Kalloniatis M. Ability of 24-2C and 24-2 grids to identify central visual field defects and structure-function concordance in glaucoma and suspects. Am J Ophthalmol. 2020;219:317–31.
Smita P, George R, Ariga M. Interpreting HFA single field reports. TNOA J Ophthalmic Sci Res. 2019;57:220–30.
Anderson DR, Patella VM. Automated static perimetry. 2nd ed. Mosby; 1999.
Heijl A, Patella VM, Chong LX, Iwase A, Leung CK, Tuulonen A, Lee GC, Callan T, Bengtsson B. A new SITA perimetric threshold testing algorithm: construction and a multicenter clinical study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2019;198:154–65.
Thulasidas M, Patyal S. Comparison of 24-2 faster, fast, and standard programs of Swedish interactive threshold algorithm of Humphrey field analyzer for perimetry in patients with manifest and suspect glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2020;29:1070–6.
Heijl A, Patella VM, Bengtsson B. The field analyser primer: effective perimetry. 4th ed; 2012.
Nayak BK, Dharwadkar S. Interpretation of autoperimetry. J Clin Ophthalmol Res. 2014;2:31–59.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Patyal, S., Gandhi, M. (2021). Interpretation of a Humphrey Single Visual Field Printout. In: Patyal, S., Gandhi, M. (eds) Resolving Dilemmas in Perimetry. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-2601-2_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-2601-2_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-16-2600-5
Online ISBN: 978-981-16-2601-2
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)