...
首页> 外文期刊>European journal of ophthalmology >Comparison of advanced visual field defects measured with the Tubingen Mobile Campimeter and the Octopus 101 perimeter.
【24h】

Comparison of advanced visual field defects measured with the Tubingen Mobile Campimeter and the Octopus 101 perimeter.

机译:用Tubingen移动式测距仪和Octopus 101测距仪测量的高级视野缺陷的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

PURPOSE: To compare the results of advanced visual field defects (VFD) measured with the conventional reference perimeter Octopus 101 (O-101) and the new portable Tubingen Mobile Campimeter (TMC). METHODS: Thirty-seven subjects (18 to 75 years), 13 with advanced arcuate scotomas, 12 with VFD respecting vertical meridians, 6 with concentric constriction and 6 healthy controls were included. First examination was with O-101: grid 30 degrees -NO, 192 stimuli, 10 cd/m(2) background luminance, stimulus size: Goldmann III (26'); second examination was with TMC: 84 stimuli (subset of grid 30 degrees -NO), stimulus size 34', stimulus luminance 320-370 cd/m(2), background luminance 8-20 cd/m(2). Pointwise accuracy (proportion of concordant locations), sensitivity, and specificity were estimated into 95% confidence intervals (CI) by averaging individual logits. Examination durations were compared. RESULTS: TMC results are highly concordant with O-101 results for all defect classes. For the entire sample, the percentage of discordant points (perceived with TMC but not with O-101) among all discordant points was 35% (CI: 30% to 40%). Analyzed by VFD pattern, accuracy was highest in healthy controls scotomas (97.9%; CI: 97% to 98.5%) and lowest in arcuate scotomas (80.6 %; CI: 77.3% to 83.5%). Sensitivity was highest in concentric constriction (94.5%; CI: 82.9% to 98.4%) and lowest in healthy controls (59.1%; CI: 26.3% to 85.3%). Specificity was highest in healthy controls (98.1%; CI: 96.6% to 98.9%) and lowest in concentric constriction (77.4%; CI: 62.1% to 87.7%). Mean examination time was 4.6 minutes (TMC) and 9.8 minutes (O-101). CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that the TMC is a feasible device for detection of VFD.
机译:目的:比较使用常规参考周界八达通101(O-101)和新型便携式Tubingen移动测距仪(TMC)测量的高级视野缺损(VFD)的结果。方法:纳入了37名受试者(18至75岁),13名晚期弓形肌瘤,12名VFD尊重垂直子午线,6名同心收缩和6名健康对照。第一次检查是使用O-101:30度网格-NO,192个刺激,10 cd / m(2)背景亮度,刺激大小:Goldmann III(26');第二次检查是使用TMC:84个刺激(30度网格的子集-NO),刺激大小34',刺激亮度320-370 cd / m(2),背景亮度8-20 cd / m(2)。通过平均各个对数,将逐点准确性(一致位置的比例),敏感性和特异性估计为95%置信区间(CI)。比较考试时间。结果:对于所有缺陷类别,TMC结果与O-101结果高度一致。对于整个样本,所有不符点中不符点(使用TMC而不是O-101感知)的百分比为35%(CI:30%至40%)。通过VFD模式分析,在健康对照组中,准确性最高(97.9%; CI:97%至98.5%),而在弓形肉瘤中则最低(80.6%; CI:77.3%至83.5%)。在同心收缩中敏感性最高(94.5%; CI:82.9%至98.4%),而在健康对照组中最低(59.1%; CI:26.3%至85.3%)。健康对照组的特异性最高(98.1%; CI:96.6%至98.9%),同心收缩的特异性最低(77.4%; CI:62.1%至87.7%)。平均检查时间为4.6分钟(TMC)和9.8分钟(O-101)。结论:结果表明,TMC是检测VFD的可行设备。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号