Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 18, 2026
Comparison of Three Clinical Stereoscopic Methods for Measuring Binocular Visual Function During Amblyopic Treatment in Unilateral Amblyopia
Published on: September 27, 2024
Comparison of Three Visual Field Tests in Children: Frequency Doubling Test, 24-2 and 30-2 SITA Perimetry
Sangyoun Han1, Seung-Hee Baek1, Ungsoo Samuel Kim1,2
1a Department of Ophthalmology , Kim's Eye Hospital, Seoul , Korea.
Insights
Frequency Doubling Technology (FDT) perimetry is more reliable than 30-2 SITA perimetry in children. For pediatric visual field testing, 24-2 SITA perimetry is the optimal choice due to its speed and reliability.
Area of Science:
- Ophthalmology
- Visual Science
- Pediatric Optometry
Background:
- Assessing visual field reliability in children is crucial for early detection of eye conditions.
- Standard perimetry methods may present challenges in pediatric populations.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the reliability of Frequency Doubling Technology (FDT) perimetry with Humphrey 24-2 and 30-2 SITA perimetry in children.
- To determine the optimal visual field testing strategy for pediatric patients.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective review of 274 pediatric eyes (aged 6-12 years) undergoing FDT and Humphrey 24-2/30-2 perimetry.
- Analysis of reliability indexes including fixation losses, test duration, and false positive/negative errors.
- Subgroup analysis based on normal (>0.8 Snellen) and low (≤0.8 Snellen) visual acuity.
Main Results:
- 24-2 perimetry demonstrated the shortest test duration in both normal and low visual acuity subgroups.
- FDT perimetry showed lower fixation loss and false error rates compared to 30-2 perimetry.
- No significant difference in reliability was found between FDT and 24-2 SITA perimetry.
Conclusions:
- FDT perimetry is more reliable than 30-2 SITA perimetry for pediatric visual field assessment.
- 24-2 SITA perimetry is recommended as the optimal choice for pediatric patients, balancing test duration and reliability.
Background:
To investigate the reliability of FDT and 24-2 and 30-2 Humphrey perimetry in children.
Methods:
We retrospectively reviewed the records corresponding to 274 eyes of children aged 6-12 years, who underwent FDT and 30-2 and 24-2 Humphrey visual field testing from January 2011 through March 2013. Each test group was divided into two subgroups: a normal visual acuity subgroup (> 0.8 Snellen, group 1) and a low visual acuity subgroup (≤0.8 Snellen, group 2). Reliability indexes such as fixation losses, test duration, and the number and rate of false-positive errors were analyzed.
Results:
In both subgroups, test duration was shortest for 24-2 perimetry (group 1: p < 0.0001; group 2: p < 0.0001). FDT was associated with lower rates of fixation loss, false positive errors, and false negative errors than 30-2 perimetry. However, the fixation loss rate of FDT was only significantly lower under the subgroup analysis. The normal visual acuity subgroup had a higher MD score on FDT vs. 30-2 perimetry (P = 0.028). However, the PSD was similar for all tests.
Conclusion:
This reliability study showed that FDT perimetry is superior to 30-2 SITA perimetry. There was no significant difference in the reliability indexes for FDT and 24-2 SITA perimetry; thus, when considering test duration and reliability, 24-2 SITA perimetry appears to be the optimal choice in pediatric patients.
