Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 3, 2026
Dynamic Visual Tests to Identify and Quantify Visual Damage and Repair Following Demyelination in Optic Neuritis Patients
Published on: April 14, 2014
Frequency doubling perimetry and the detection of eye disease in the community
G A Cioffi1, S Mansberger, P Spry
1Devers Eye Institute, Portland, Oregon, USA.
Purpose:
Frequency Doubling Technology (FDT) perimetry is a novel perimetric test that provides rapid screening (45 to 60 seconds) and full-threshold (4 to 5 minutes) testing for detection of vision loss. The purpose of this study was to determine the specificity and sensitivity of FDT perimetry for the detection of ocular disease.
Methods:
A total of 130 participants (257 eyes of 42 men and 88 women) recruited from the community completed FDT perimetry, standard achromatic automated perimetry (SAP), anterior segment biomicroscopy, tonometry, and dilated ophthalmoscopy. FDT results were considered abnormal if 1 point was abnormal (depressed below the 5% level on the screening protocol C-20-5). SAP was considered abnormal if the glaucoma hemifield test or pattern standard deviation was outside normal limits (P < .05) or a hemifield cluster of 3 depressed points on the pattern deviation probability plot (P < .05) was present. An abnormal eye examination was defined as the presence of an abnormality in the anterior segment, lens, or posterior segment that was likely to cause a visual field defect or the presence of glaucomatous or other optic neuropathy.
Results:
The mean age (+/- SD) of participants was 55.5 years (+/- 10.3). Ethnic groups, as reported by participants, included 77 (59%) African Americans, 40 (31%) Caucasians, and 13 (10%) in other groups. On clinical examination, 116 eyes (45%) were normal, 9 eyes (3.5%) had a cataract with best corrected visual acuity worse than 20/30, 16 eyes (6%) had open-angle glaucoma, and 17 eyes (7%) had retinal findings or lesions that were likely to cause a visual field defect. For FDT perimetry, 22 (8.6%) of 257 tests were unreliable, and for SAP, 65 (25.3%) of 257 tests were unreliable. The sensitivity and specificity of FDT perimetry for detecting an abnormal clinical examination were 55% and 90% and for detecting an abnormal examination that included an abnormal SAP, 64% and 86%.
Conclusions:
FDP demonstrated reasonable discriminatory power for detecting eye disease.
