Repeatability of Online Circular Contrast Perimetry Compared to Standard Automated Perimetry

Author:

Meyerov Joshua1,Chen Yang2,Busija Lazar23,Green Catherine23,Skalicky Simon E.23

Affiliation:

1. Department of Ophthalmology, The Alfred Hospital, Alfred Health

2. Department of Surgery Ophthalmology, University of Melbourne

3. Glaucoma Investigation and Research Unit, The Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

Abstract

Précis: Online circular contrast perimetry provides visual field assessment on any computer or tablet with no extra hardware. It has good test repeatability and reliability that is comparable with standard automated perimetry. It holds promise for use in disease screening and surveillance to expand the provision of glaucoma care. Purpose: To evaluate the repeatability of online circular contrast perimetry (OCCP) compared to standard automated perimetry (SAP) in normal participants and patients with stable glaucoma over 18 weeks. Methods: Thirty-six participants (13 normal controls and 23 patients with open angle glaucoma) were recruited. OCCP and SAP perimetry tests were performed twice at baseline, then at 6, 12, and 18 weeks. Global perimetric indices were compared between perimetry types and analyzed for short-term and intermediate-term repeatability. Results: There were no statistically significant changes over time for both OCCP and SAP across all groups for mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation, and visual index/visual field index (P>0.05). Test-retest intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for OCCP MD were excellent at baseline (0.98, 95% CI: 0.89–0.99) and good at 18 weeks (0.88, 95% CI: 0.51–0.98). SAP test-retest ICCs were excellent at baseline (0.94, 95% CI: 0.70–0.99) and 18 weeks (0.97, 95% CI: 0.84–0.99). Inter-test ICCs were good, ranging from 0.84 to 0.87. OCCP testing time was shorter than SAP (5:29 ± 1:24 vs. 6:00 ± 1:05, P<0.001). OCCP had similar false-positive (3.84 ± 3.32 vs. 3.66 ± 4.53, P=0.48) but lower false-negative (0.73 ± 1.52 vs. 4.48 ± 5.00, P<0.001) and fixation loss responses (0.91 ± 1.32 vs. 2.02 ± 2.17, P<0.001). Conclusions: OCCP allows visual field assessment on any computer screen with no additional hardware. It demonstrated good repeatability and reliability with similar performance indices to SAP in both the short term and intermediate term. OCCP has the potential to be utilized as a glaucoma screening and surveillance tool for in-clinic and at-home testing, expanding the provision of care.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3