Related Experiment Videos
Reliability indexes of automated perimetric tests
1Dana Center for Preventive Ophthalmology, Wilmer Institute, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD 21205.
Archives of Ophthalmology (Chicago, Ill. : 1960)
|September 1, 1988
Summary
Automated visual field test results are often unreliable, particularly in glaucoma patients. A significant percentage of tests were rejected due to fixation loss and false-negative rates, impacting diagnostic accuracy.
Area of Science:
- Ophthalmology
- Visual Science
Background:
- Automated perimetric testing is crucial for diagnosing and monitoring glaucoma.
- Test result reliability is typically assessed using fixation loss, false-positive, and false-negative rates.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the reliability of automated perimetric test results in glaucoma patients and normal controls.
- To identify the primary factors contributing to unreliable test results.
Main Methods:
- Visual field testing (C-30-2 program) was performed on 76 glaucomatous and 248 normal subjects.
- Manufacturer's reliability criteria, including fixation loss and false-negative rates, were applied.
Main Results:
- 45% of glaucoma tests and 30% of normal control tests were deemed unreliable.
- Fixation loss was the most common reason for unreliability.
- Glaucoma subjects had a higher rejection rate due to increased false-negative responses, not explained by age, pupil diameter, or visual acuity.
Conclusions:
- A substantial proportion of automated visual field tests are unreliable, necessitating careful interpretation.
- Fixation loss and false-negative rates are key indicators of unreliable perimetric data in glaucoma assessment.