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 Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: A Narrative Review.

British journal of biomedical science·2022
Same author

Angiogenesis, Metabolism, Endothelial and Platelet Markers in Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease.

British journal of biomedical science·2022
Same author

Oxygen saturation in retinal vessels and their correlation with endothelial microparticles in diabetes mellitus and/or cardiovascular disease.

Microvascular research·2022
Same author

The relationship of systemic markers of haemostasis with retinal blood vessel responses in cardiovascular disease and/or diabetes.

British journal of biomedical science·2018
Same author

Retinal vessel diameters and reactivity in diabetes mellitus and/or cardiovascular disease.

Cardiovascular diabetology·2017
Same author

The relationship of systemic markers of renal function and vascular function with retinal blood vessel responses.

Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie·2016

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Oct 8, 2025

Author Spotlight: Assessment of Visual Acuity in Central Vision Loss Through Motion-Based Peripheral Vision Testing
06:25

Author Spotlight: Assessment of Visual Acuity in Central Vision Loss Through Motion-Based Peripheral Vision Testing

Published on: February 23, 2024

756

Comparative quantification of focal and diffuse visual field loss by the SPARK Precision threshold algorithm and

S K Foo1, R P Cubbidge2,3, R Heitmar4,5

  • 1Faculty of Optometry and Vision Sciences, SEGi University, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia.

Graefe'S Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology = Albrecht Von Graefes Archiv Fur Klinische Und Experimentelle Ophthalmologie
|December 28, 2021
PubMed
Summary

The SPARK Precision algorithm is faster but less sensitive than the SITA Standard Humphrey Field Analyser (HFA) for detecting early glaucoma visual field loss. SPARK Precision may underestimate disease severity, potentially impacting long-term patient monitoring.

Keywords:
CataractGlaucomaPerimetrySITASPARK PrecisionVisual field

More Related Videos

Assessing Binocular Central Visual Field and Binocular Eye Movements in a Dichoptic Viewing Condition
07:45

Assessing Binocular Central Visual Field and Binocular Eye Movements in a Dichoptic Viewing Condition

Published on: July 21, 2020

4.6K
Assessing Early Stage Open-Angle Glaucoma in Patients by Isolated-Check Visual Evoked Potential
07:11

Assessing Early Stage Open-Angle Glaucoma in Patients by Isolated-Check Visual Evoked Potential

Published on: May 25, 2020

6.5K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Oct 8, 2025

Author Spotlight: Assessment of Visual Acuity in Central Vision Loss Through Motion-Based Peripheral Vision Testing
06:25

Author Spotlight: Assessment of Visual Acuity in Central Vision Loss Through Motion-Based Peripheral Vision Testing

Published on: February 23, 2024

756
Assessing Binocular Central Visual Field and Binocular Eye Movements in a Dichoptic Viewing Condition
07:45

Assessing Binocular Central Visual Field and Binocular Eye Movements in a Dichoptic Viewing Condition

Published on: July 21, 2020

4.6K
Assessing Early Stage Open-Angle Glaucoma in Patients by Isolated-Check Visual Evoked Potential
07:11

Assessing Early Stage Open-Angle Glaucoma in Patients by Isolated-Check Visual Evoked Potential

Published on: May 25, 2020

6.5K

Area of Science:

  • Ophthalmology
  • Visual field testing
  • Glaucoma diagnostics

Background:

  • Visual field loss is a key indicator of glaucoma progression.
  • Accurate and efficient visual field testing is crucial for diagnosis and management.
  • Comparing novel algorithms to established standards is essential for clinical adoption.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the threshold agreement between the SPARK Precision algorithm (Oculus Twinfield 2) and the SITA Standard Humphrey Field Analyser (HFA) algorithm.
  • To evaluate the performance of SPARK Precision in detecting focal (glaucoma) and diffuse (cataract) visual field loss.
  • To assess the time efficiency and diagnostic accuracy of the SPARK Precision algorithm.

Main Methods:

  • 39 treated glaucoma patients and 31 cataract patients were tested with both Oculus Twinfield 2 (SPARK Precision) and HFA 3 (SITA Standard).
  • Visual field data including Mean Sensitivity (MS), Mean Deviation (MD), and Pattern Standard Deviation (PSD) were analyzed.
  • Glaucoma severity was classified using the AGIS score.

Main Results:

  • SPARK Precision testing was approximately twice as fast as SITA Standard.
  • While MS showed good correlation, MD and PSD were significantly less severe with SPARK Precision in both glaucoma and cataract groups.
  • Poor agreement was found for global indices, with significant proportional bias in MD and PSD. SPARK Precision yielded higher threshold estimates in the nasal field and lower AGIS scores for glaucoma severity.

Conclusions:

  • SITA Standard detects deeper visual field defects than SPARK Precision.
  • SPARK Precision may not adequately quantify early glaucomatous field loss due to its algorithm and the Twinfield 2's dynamic range.
  • The plateau effect in SPARK Precision, while not clinically significant in early glaucoma, could impede long-term monitoring of disease progression.