Assessment of retinal sensitivity using a time-saving strategy in normal individuals

Background The purpose of this study was to compare retinal sensitivities in normal individuals obtained using the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm Standard (SITA-S) on the Humphrey field analyzer with those obtained using the Dynamic strategy on the Octopus. Methods Prior to visual field examinations, the background luminance, stimulus size, and exposure time with the Octopus 101 were conformed to the Humphrey field analyzer II settings. Volunteers over 20 years of age without apparent ophthalmic abnormalities were examined with the SITA-S central 30-2 program followed by the Dynamic 32 program. Eye with corrected visual acuity ≥ 0.8, refraction ≥ −6.0 diopters, and fields with satisfactory levels of reliability in SITA-S and Dynamic were selected. Results Sixty-seven eyes from 67 normal individuals of mean age 51.3 ± 16.3 (range 22–76) years satisfied the selection criteria and were analyzed. Mean retinal sensitivity was significantly (P < 0.0001) higher with SITA-S (29.0 ± 2.4 dB) than with Dynamic (26.8 ± 2.1 dB). Changes in retinal sensitivity with increasing age were significantly (P = 0.0003) greater with Dynamic (−0.09 ± 0.04 dB/year; 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.10 to −0.08 dB/year) than with SITA-S (−0.07 ± 0.04 dB/year, 95% CI −0.08 to −0.06 dB/year). When classifying the visual field into three areas (central, mid-peripheral, and peripheral), retinal sensitivities with SITA-S were significantly higher in all areas than with Dynamic (P < 0.0001 for all three areas). Conclusion Differences in Dynamic and SITA-S strategies may contribute to the differences in retinal sensitivities observed in normal individuals.

[1]  A. Béchetoille,et al.  [Data bank for analysis of the normal visual field using the 30/1 central program of the automated Humphrey perimeter]. , 1986, Journal francais d'ophtalmologie.

[2]  G. Jaffe,et al.  Age-related changes of the normal visual field. , 1986, Archives of ophthalmology.

[3]  G. Lindgren,et al.  Normal variability of static perimetric threshold values across the central visual field. , 1987, Archives of ophthalmology.

[4]  Y. Ohno,et al.  On age-related norms of the visual field. , 1988, Japanese journal of ophthalmology.

[5]  F. Fankhauser,et al.  Threshold fluctuations in the Humphrey Field Analyzer and in the Octopus automated perimeter. , 1988, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[6]  C. Krakau.  Temporal summation and perimetry. , 1989, Ophthalmic research.

[7]  J. Weber.  [A new strategy for automated static perimetry]. , 1990, Fortschritte der Ophthalmologie : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft.

[8]  J Katz,et al.  Comparison of analytic algorithms for detecting glaucomatous visual field loss. , 1991, Archives of ophthalmology.

[9]  J. Caprioli,et al.  Number of stimuli as a reliability parameter in perimetry. , 1992, German journal of ophthalmology.

[10]  J. Weber,et al.  The properties of perimetric thresholds in normal and glaucomatous eyes. , 1992, German journal of ophthalmology.

[11]  Douglas R. Anderson.  Automated Static Perimetry , 1992 .

[12]  J. D. Tompkins,et al.  Characteristics of frequency-of-seeing curves in normal subjects, patients with suspected glaucoma, and patients with glaucoma. , 1993, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[13]  E. Glass,et al.  Simulations for FASTPAC and the standard 4-2 dB full-threshold strategy of the Humphrey Field Analyzer. , 1995, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[14]  J. Weber,et al.  Test time and efficiency of the dynamic strategy in glaucoma perimetry. , 1995, German journal of ophthalmology.

[15]  J. Flammer,et al.  [Perimetry with normal Octopus technique and Weber 'dynamic' technique. Initial results with reference to reproducibility of measurements in glaucoma patients]. , 1996, Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft.

[16]  H. Rootzén,et al.  A new generation of algorithms for computerized threshold perimetry, SITA. , 2009, Acta ophthalmologica Scandinavica.

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

[18]  B. Bengtsson,et al.  Evaluation of a new threshold visual field strategy, SITA, in normal subjects. Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm. , 1998, Acta ophthalmologica Scandinavica.

[19]  J. Wild,et al.  The SITA perimetric threshold algorithms in glaucoma. , 1999, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[20]  T. Berg,et al.  COMPARISON OF SITA AND DYNAMIC STRATEGIES WITH THE SAME EXAMINATION GRID , 1999 .

[21]  C. Johnson,et al.  Static and acuity profile perimetry at various adaptation levels , 1981, Documenta Ophthalmologica.

[22]  R. Anderson,et al.  Sensitivity loss in early glaucoma can be mapped to an enlargement of the area of complete spatial summation. , 2010, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.