Multi-centre comparison between device-independent web-browser perimetry (Melbourne Rapid Fields-web) and SITA-Faster...

Area of Science:

• Ophthalmology
• Medical Technology

Background:

• Standard automated perimetry is crucial for glaucoma diagnosis and management.
• Access to standard perimetry equipment can be limited by cost and availability in certain regions.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate the Melbourne Rapid Fields-web (MRF-web) as a potential alternative for visual field testing.
• To compare the diagnostic performance of MRF-web with the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA).

Main Methods:

• A retrospective, cross-sectional study involving 232 patients with glaucoma or normal eyes.
• Comparison of MRF-web test outcomes against Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) 24-2 SITA Faster using Deming regressions, Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC), and Bland-Altman analysis.

Main Results:

• MRF-web demonstrated comparable diagnostic capacity to HFA SITA-Faster, with high concordance for Mean Deviation (MD) and Pattern Deviation (PD).
• Bland-Altman analysis showed minimal bias for MD (-0.50dB) and PD (-0.58dB).
• False positive and fixation loss rates were similar, with MRF-web testing approximately one minute longer.

Conclusions:

• MRF-web provides comparable outcomes to HFA SITA-Faster for visual field testing.
• The portability and cost-effectiveness of MRF-web make it a suitable alternative for visual field testing in resource-limited settings.