Clinical experience with the Fieldmaster perimeter

Area of Science:

• Ophthalmology
• Visual Science

Background:

• Visual field testing is crucial for diagnosing and monitoring various eye conditions.
• Goldmann kinetic perimetry is a standard but time-consuming method.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate the efficacy and reliability of the Fieldmaster Model 200 for visual field testing in a clinical setting.
• To compare Fieldmaster testing with Goldmann kinetic perimetry.

Main Methods:

• 167 consecutive patients underwent perimetry using the Fieldmaster Model 200.
• Results were compared against Goldmann kinetic perimetry findings.

Main Results:

• Fieldmaster testing identified 95% of defects found by Goldmann perimetry.
• False-positive and false-negative rates were minimal.
• Unskilled personnel could perform the test effectively.
• Incomplete examination rates decreased to <2% with familiarity.

Conclusions:

• Fieldmaster Model 200 is a highly effective and reliable tool for visual field testing in clinical practice.
• It offers comparable diagnostic accuracy to Goldmann perimetry with improved efficiency.
• The test is suitable for use by various personnel, enhancing accessibility.