Abstract
Nineteen glaucoma patients, 17 ocular hypertensives, and 16 normal subjects underwent visual field testing on the Humphrey Field Analyzer using two programs: full threshold (thresholding of all test points with double-crossing technique) and quantification of defects (thresholding only points that deviated more than 6 dB from a presumed normal retinal contour). The purpose of the study was to compare the diagnostic value of information gained by the latter, less time-consuming test with that of the full threshold procedure. The average time requirement per eye was 13 min 11 s for full thresholding and 4 min 22 s for quantification of defects. Of the 104 sets of fields, the diagnosis was at variance in 18. The differences were most often due to shallow defects in otherwise normal fields or shallow defects surrounding deeper scotomas that had been detected by both programs. The shallow defects placed the fields in more advanced diagnostic categories and were all detected with the full threshold technique.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Beck RW, Bergstrom TJ, Lichter PR (1985) A clinical comparison of visual field testing with a new automated perimeter, the Humphrey Field Analyser, and the Goldmann perimeter. Ophthalmology 92:77–82
Fankhauser F, Spahr J, Bebie H (1977) Some aspects of the automation of perimetry. Surv Ophthalmol 22:131–141
Flammer J, Drance JM, Zulauf M (1984) Differential light threshold. Arch Ophthalmol 102:704–706
Hart WM, Becker B (1982) The onset and evolution of glaucomatous visual field defects. Ophthalmology 89:268–279
Heijl A (1977) Computer test logics for automated perimetry. Acta Ophthalmol 55: 837–853
Heijl A (1984) Strategies for detection of glaucoma defects. In: Drance SM, Anderson DR (eds) Automated perimetry in glaucoma. Grune and Stratton, Orlando, p 45
Heijl A, Drance SM (1983) Changes in differential threshold in patients with glaucoma during prolonged perimetry. Br J Ophthalmol 67:512–516
Li SG, Spaeth GL, Scimeca HA, Schatz NJ, Savino P (1979) Clinical experiences with the use of an automated perimeter (Octopus) in the diagnosis and management of patients with glaucoma and neurologic disease. Ophthalmology 86:1302–1311
Mills RP, Hopp RM, Drance SM (1986) Comparison of quantitative testing with the Octopus, Humphrey, and Tübingen perimeters. Am J Ophthalmol 102:496–504
Schmied U (1980) Automated (Octopus) and manual (Goldmann) perimetry in glaucoma. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 213:239–244
Stürmer J, Vokt B (1984) Recent advances in the study of glaucomatous field defects using the Octopus Automated Perimeter. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 184:249–253
Werner EB, Drance SM (1977) Early visual field disturbances in glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 85:1173–1175
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Stewart, W.C., Shields, M.B. & Ollie, A.R. Full threshold versus quantification of defects for visual field testing in glaucoma. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 227, 51–54 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02169826
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02169826