Test-retest variability of frequency-doubling perimetry and conventional perimetry in glaucoma patients and normal subjects.

PURPOSE To compare the test-retest variability characteristics of frequency-doubling perimetry, a new perimetric test, with those of conventional perimetry in glaucoma patients and normal control subjects. METHODS The study sample contained 64 patients and 47 normal subjects aged 66.16+/-11.86 and 64.26+/-7.99 years (mean +/- SD), respectively. All subjects underwent frequency-doubling perimetry (using the threshold mode) and conventional perimetry (using program 30-2 of the Humphrey Field Analyzer; Humphrey Instruments, San Leandro, CA) in one randomly selected eye. Each test was repeated at 1-week intervals for five tests with each technique over 4 weeks. Empirical 5th and 95th percentiles of the distribution of threshold deviations at retest were determined for all combinations of single tests and mean of two tests, stratified by threshold deviation. The influence of visual field eccentricity and overall visual field loss on variability also were examined. RESULTS Mean test time with frequency-doubling perimetry in patients and normal control subjects was 5.90 and 5.25 minutes, respectively, and with conventional perimetry was 17.20 and 14.01 minutes, respectively. In patients, there was a significant correlation between the results of the two techniques, in the full field and in quadrants, whereas in normal subjects there was no such correlation. In patients, the retest variability of conventional perimetry in locations with 20-dB loss was 120% (single tests) and 127% (mean tests) higher compared with that in locations with 0-dB loss. Comparative figures for frequency-doubling perimetry were 40% and 47%, respectively. Variability also increased more with threshold deviation in normal subjects tested with conventional perimetry. In both patients and normal subjects, variability increased with visual field eccentricity in conventional perimetry, but not in frequency-doubling perimetry. Both techniques showed an increase in variability with overall visual field damage. CONCLUSIONS Frequency-doubling perimetry has different test-retest variability characteristics than conventional perimetry and may have potential for monitoring glaucomatous field damage.

[1]  Technique for determining glaucomatous visual field progression by using animation graphics. , 1994, American journal of ophthalmology.

[2]  A Heijl,et al.  Test-retest variability in glaucomatous visual fields. , 1989, American journal of ophthalmology.

[3]  A Heijl,et al.  Glaucoma Hemifield Test. Automated visual field evaluation. , 1992, Archives of ophthalmology.

[4]  D B Henson,et al.  Influence of fixation accuracy on threshold variability in patients with open angle glaucoma. , 1996, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[5]  A. Cowey,et al.  Retinal ganglion cells that project to the dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus in the macaque monkey , 1984, Neuroscience.

[6]  B. Chauhan,et al.  Variability in patients with glaucomatous visual field damage is reduced using size V stimuli. , 1997, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[7]  R. Weinreb,et al.  Motion Perception Thresholds In Areas of Glaucomatous Visual Field Loss , 1997, Vision Research.

[8]  C. Johnson.  Selective versus nonselective losses in glaucoma. , 1994, Journal of glaucoma.

[9]  Earl L. Smith,et al.  Retinal inputs to the monkey's lateral geniculate nucleus in experimental glaucoma , 1993 .

[10]  G. Dunkelberger,et al.  Chronic glaucoma selectively damages large optic nerve fibers. , 1987, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[11]  J. Morgan.  Selective cell death in glaucoma: does it really occur? , 1994, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[12]  J. Jonas,et al.  The full-field flicker test in early diagnosis of chronic open-angle glaucoma. , 1997, American journal of ophthalmology.

[13]  R. Shapley,et al.  The primate retina contains two types of ganglion cells, with high and low contrast sensitivity. , 1986, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[14]  G. Dunkelberger,et al.  Retinal ganglion cell atrophy correlated with automated perimetry in human eyes with glaucoma. , 1989, American journal of ophthalmology.

[15]  R. Starita,et al.  Total variance of serial Octopus visual fields in glaucomatous eyes , 1987 .

[16]  G. Trick,et al.  Motion perception is abnormal in primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. , 1990, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[17]  Ted Maddess,et al.  Performance of nonlinear visual units in ocular hypertension and glaucoma , 1992 .

[18]  M. Wall,et al.  Random dot motion perimetry in patients with glaucoma and in normal subjects. , 1995, American journal of ophthalmology.

[19]  C. Johnson,et al.  Screening for glaucomatous visual field loss with frequency-doubling perimetry. , 1997, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[20]  D. H. Kelly.  Frequency Doubling in Visual Responses , 1966 .

[21]  W Seiple,et al.  Electrophysiological and psychophysical flicker sensitivity in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. , 1990, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[22]  C. Richter.  Automatic Perimetry in Glaucoma , 1986 .

[23]  C W Tyler,et al.  Specific deficits of flicker sensitivity in glaucoma and ocular hypertension. , 1981, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[24]  Peripheral displacement thresholds in normals, ocular hypertensives and glaucoma , 1987 .

[25]  H A Quigley,et al.  Retinal ganglion cell loss is size dependent in experimental glaucoma. , 1991, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[26]  E. Hedley‐Whyte,et al.  Lateral geniculate nucleus in glaucoma. , 1993, American journal of ophthalmology.

[27]  B Petrig,et al.  Variability of automated visual fields in clinically stable glaucoma patients. , 1989, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[28]  W R Green,et al.  Chronic human glaucoma causing selectively greater loss of large optic nerve fibers. , 1988, Ophthalmology.

[29]  C. Krakau,et al.  A NOTE ON FIXATION DURING PERIMETRY , 1977, Acta ophthalmologica.

[30]  C. Curcio,et al.  Topography of ganglion cells in human retina , 1990, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[31]  L Dandona,et al.  Selective effects of experimental glaucoma on axonal transport by retinal ganglion cells to the dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus. , 1991, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[32]  D H Kelly,et al.  Nonlinear visual responses to flickering sinusoidal gratings. , 1981, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[33]  H A Quigley,et al.  Foveal ganglion cell loss is size dependent in experimental glaucoma. , 1993, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.