Turkish Abstract Abstract PDF Similar Articles Mail to Author

¹Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Göz Hastalıkları A.D., İzmir, Uzm. Dr.
²Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Göz Hastalıkları A.D., İzmir, Asist. Dr.
³Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Göz Hastalıkları A.D., İzmir, Prof. Dr. Purpose: To compare the size and depth of glaucomatous visual field defects, global indices and testing time in Humphrey perimeter using full threshold (FT), SITA standard (SS), SITA fast (SF) and fastpac (FP) algorithms.
Materials and Methods: Thirty-one eyes of 31 patients with visual field defects due to primary open angle glaucoma were included in the study prospectively. All patients were examined with the four test strategies (FT, SS, SF, FP) using Humphrey perimeter.
Results: Mean age was 67.9±7.9 years. Testing time was 14.8±3.1 min., 10.3±1.7 min., 8.4±1.1 min. and 5.6±1.0 min. in FT, FP, SS and SF algorithms, respectively. Difference in testing time was statistically significant between all groups (p<0.001). MD was 14.1±6.9 dB, -13.6±7.2 dB, -13.4±7.4 dB and -11.0±9.2 dB in FT, FP, SS and SF algorithms, respectively. MD was found better in SF when compared to FT (p<0.01). PSD was found 10.3±3.1 dB, 9.4±3.1 dB, 10.8±3.7 dB and 9.5±3.8 dB in FT, FP, SS and SF algorithms, respectively. Statistically significant difference was found between FT-FP, FPSS, SS-SF (p<0.01). Visual field defect size was 17.6±6.7, 16.6±7.2, 18.4±6.8 and 18.6±5.5 in FT, FP, SS and SF algorithms, respectively. Visual field defect depth was found 340.6±185.9 dB, 312.3±203.5 dB, 349.6±218.9 dB and 306.9±194.0 dB in FT, FP, SS and SF algorithms, respectively. No difference was found between groups in respect to defect size and depth (p>0.01).
Conclusion: Testing time is reduced remarkebly with SITA. Visual field defect size and depth were found similar in different algorithms. Keywords : Visual field, glaucoma