Study of Optimal Perimetric Testing In Children (OPTIC): developing consensus and setting research priorities for perimetry in the management of children with glaucoma
Author:
Patel Dipesh E., Cumberland Phillippa M., Walters Bronwen C., Abbott Joseph, Brookes John, Edmunds Beth, Khaw Peng TeeORCID, Lloyd Ian Christopher, Papadopoulos Maria, Sung Velota, Cortina-Borja Mario, Rahi Jugnoo S., Khaw Peng Tee, Walters Bronwen, Cumberland Phillippa, Russell-Eggitt Isabelle, Timms Christine, Brookes John, Moore Anthony, Papadopoulos Maria, Garway-Heath David, Viswanathan Ananth, Liasis Alki, Crabb David, Cortina-Borja Mario, Patel Dipesh, Rahi Jugnoo,
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Perimetry is important in the management of children with glaucoma, but there is limited evidence-based guidance on its use. We report an expert consensus-based study to update guidance and identify areas requiring further research.
Methods
Experts were invited to participate in a modified Delphi consensus process. Panel selection was based on clinical experience of managing children with glaucoma and UK-based training to minimise diversity of view due to healthcare setting. Questionnaires were delivered electronically, and analysed to establish ‘agreement’. Divergence of opinions was investigated and resolved where possible through further iterations.
Results
7/9 experts invited agreed to participate. Consensus (≥5/7 (71%) in agreement) was achieved for 21/26 (80.8%) items in 2 rounds, generating recommendations to start perimetry from approximately 7 years of age (IQR: 6.75–7.25), and use qualitative methods in conjunction with automated reliability indices to assess test quality. There was a lack of agreement about defining progressive visual field (VF) loss and methods for implementing perimetry longitudinally.
Panel members highlighted the importance of informing decisions based upon individual circumstances—from gauging maturity/capability when selecting tests and interpreting outcomes, to accounting for specific clinical features (e.g. poor IOP control and/or suspected progressive VF loss) when making decisions about frequency of testing.
Conclusions
There is commonality of expert views in relation to implementing perimetry and interpreting test quality in the management of children with glaucoma. However, there remains a lack of agreement about defining progressive VF loss, and utilising perimetry over an individuals’ lifetime, highlighting the need for further research.
Funder
Guide Dogs for the Blind Association
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference22 articles.
1. Weinreb RN, Grajewski A, Papadopoulos M, Grigg J, Freedman S. Childhood glaucoma. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Kugler Publications; 2013. 2. Taylor RH, Ainsworth JR, Evans AR, Levin AV. The epidemiology of pediatric glaucoma: the Toronto experience. J AAPOS. 1999;3:308–15. 3. Papadopoulos M, Cable N, Rahi J, Khaw PT. The British infantile and childhood glaucoma (BIG) eye study. Investig Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48:4100–6. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.06-1350. 4. Papadopoulos M, Edmunds B, Fenerty C, Khaw PT. Childhood glaucoma surgery in the 21st century. Eye. 2014;28:931–43. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2014.140. 5. National Guideline A. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence: Clinical Guidelines. Glaucoma: diagnosis and management. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (UK) Copyright (c) National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2017.
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|