Confiabilidad de la campimetría manual por confrontación para detectar defectos de campos visuales en patologías neurológicas

摘要

Introduction: Different methods of assessing visual field by confrontation (VFC) with the Goldmann Perimetry (GP) are compared. Method: 52 consecutive patients evaluated in Neuropthalmology Department that met inclusion criteria. Seven tests of VFC and GP are performed on each patient. Sensitivity, specificity and degree of association of each test confrontation regarding Goldmann Perimetry is evaluated. Results: The tests were the most sensitive tests comparing fingers (58%) and compared red (55%) Color object. Greater specificity tests were counting fingers (95%), finger movement in a fixed position of the hand in different quadrants (95%), finger movement from the periphery to the center of the quadrants (93%) and test moving red pin of 5 mm (93%). The two most sensitive tests had low specificity. Conclusions: The VFC is performed routinely in all neuroopthalmology patients. Tests are of limited use for screening visual pathway pathology because of its low sensitivity but the detected alterations are sufficiently specific. The most useful tests were dynamic (moving from the periphery to the center finger or a red pin). To confirm the diagnosis and monitoring is needed as objective evidence of Goldmann Perimetry.