A comparison of Goldmann, Fieldmaster 200, and Dicon AP2000 perimeters used in a screening mode

Many unsubstantiated claims have been made regarding the superiority of a given method of stimulus presentation or fixation monitoring during perimetry. The Goldmann perimeter uses a projected stimulus with manual fixation monitoring. The Fieldmaster 200 uses fiberoptic stimulus and photoelectric fixation control, and the Dicon AP2000 uses LED stimulus with Heijl - Krakau and manual fixation monitoring. One hundred twenty-three eyes (33 normal, 86 abnormal) were tested on each of the three perimeters using a rigid screening protocol designed to minimize other variables. Quantitative Goldmann perimetry was then performed as a standard against which to compare the screeners . False alarm rates of 6 to 9% and detection rates of 90 to 94% were found with the three screening perimeters, which were essentially equivalent in performance.