Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Laser pointer visual field screening.

Michael S Lee1, Laura J Balcer, Nicholas J Volpe

  • 1Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.

Journal of Neuro-Ophthalmology : the Official Journal of the North American Neuro-Ophthalmology Society
|December 10, 2003
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Pearls & Oy-sters: Radiologic Lag in Pediatric-Onset Multiple Sclerosis.

Neurology·2026
Same author

Brain regional susceptibility to tauopathy in individuals at risk for chronic traumatic encephalopathy.

Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association·2026
Same author

Dose-dependent white matter changes associated with repetitive head impacts in former American football players.

Brain communications·2026
Same author

Cognitive, biomarker, and neuroimaging indices associated with traumatic encephalopathy syndrome across two independent athlete cohorts.

Alzheimer's research & therapy·2026
Same author

Management of adverse events in patients with pediatric low-grade glioma treated with MAPK-directed therapies: Delphi consensus recommendations and unmet needs.

Neuro-oncology practice·2026
Same author

Cognitive, biomarker, and neuroimaging indices associated with traumatic encephalopathy syndrome across two independent athlete cohorts.

Research square·2026

Laser visual field (LVF) screening is more sensitive than standard confrontation visual field (CVF) testing for detecting visual field defects. LVF offers a more effective and time-efficient screening tool for ophthalmology practices.

Area of Science:

  • Ophthalmology
  • Visual field testing

Background:

  • Confrontation visual field (CVF) screening has low sensitivity for detecting subtle visual field defects.
  • Automated perimetry is a standard but time-consuming method for detailed visual field assessment.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the sensitivity and specificity of laser pointer visual field screening (LVF) against conventional CVF.
  • To evaluate LVF as a potential screening tool for identifying eyes with abnormal automated perimetry results.

Main Methods:

  • A prospective, masked comparison of CVF and LVF testing was conducted on 175 eyes from 90 patients.
  • LVF utilized a laser pointer on a tangent screen, testing various visual field locations.
  • CVF employed finger counting techniques.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • LVF demonstrated significantly higher sensitivity (73%) compared to CVF (31%) in detecting defects identified by Humphrey visual field (HVF) testing (P = 0.001).
  • Specificities were 82% for LVF and 99% for CVF.
  • Average testing times were 0.5 min for CVF, 1.5 min for LVF, and 8.0 min for HVF.

Conclusions:

  • Laser visual field testing is significantly more sensitive than confrontation testing for visual field screening.
  • LVF may serve as an effective and time-efficient tool for identifying potential visual field abnormalities in clinical settings.