首页> 外文期刊>Ophthalmology >Comparison of visual field defects using matrix perimetry and standard achromatic perimetry.
【24h】

Comparison of visual field defects using matrix perimetry and standard achromatic perimetry.

机译:使用矩阵视野仪和标准消色差视野仪比较视野缺损。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

PURPOSE: To compare visual field (VF) defects found by Swedish interactive thresholding Algorithm (SITA) perimetry and Matrix perimetry, a new VF device that utilizes frequency doubling technology in a 24-2 test pattern. DESIGN: Prospective cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty eyes from 50 subjects with SITA field defects were recruited for an observational study. METHODS: Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm and Matrix VF testing were performed on patients from a glaucoma practice. To evaluate the learning effect on the performance of the VF, we tested subsets of each group who had previous experience with standard automated perimetry (SAP). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Test duration, mean threshold, mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD), glaucoma hemifield test, and number of abnormal points on the pattern deviation plot were evaluated for each device. RESULTS: Test duration was significantly shorter for Matrix (SITA, 357.0+/-85.6 seconds; Matrix, 319.5+/-16.5 seconds; P = 0.0002, paired t-test). Thirty-six percent of eyes with SITA VF defects showed a normal Matrix field. In 30 of 32 eyes (94%) where both devices showed VF defects, the defects were congruent. Mean threshold value was significantly lower with Matrix compared to SITA (P<0.0001, paired t-test), as was MD (-5.34+/-5.42 dB, -4.14+/-5.29 dB, respectively; P = 0.03, paired t-test). There was no significant difference in PSD between the 2 devices (P = 0.78, paired t-test). Matrix delineated significantly smaller (P = 0.005, Wilcoxon's test) and deeper (P<0.001, Wilcoxon's test) defects than those found with SITA. Similar results were observed in the subgroups with prior SAP experience. CONCLUSIONS: The Matrix examination did not detect 36% of abnormal SITA fields. Matrix field defects were smaller and deeper than those appearing in SITA perimetry.
机译:目的:为了比较瑞典交互式阈值算法(SITA)视野法和矩阵视野法发现的视野(VF)缺陷,这是一种新的VF设备,该设备在24-2测试模式中利用了倍频技术。设计:前瞻性横断面研究。参与者:从50名患有SITA视野缺损的受试者中选出50只眼进行观察研究。方法:对青光眼患者进行瑞典交互式阈值算法和矩阵VF测试。为了评估学习效果对VF性能的影响,我们测试了先前具有标准自动视野检查(SAP)经验的每组的子集。主要观察指标:对每种设备评估了试验持续时间,平均阈值,平均偏差(MD),模式标准偏差(PSD),青光眼半场试验和模式偏差图上的异常点数量。结果:Matrix的测试持续时间明显缩短(SITA为357.0 +/- 85.6秒; Matrix为319.5 +/- 16.5秒; P = 0.0002,配对t检验)。有SITA VF缺陷的眼睛中有36%的人显示正常的Matrix视野。在两种设备均显示VF缺陷的32只眼中,有30只(94%)的缺陷完全一致。与SITA相比,Matrix的平均阈值显着更低(P <0.0001,成对t检验),MD分别为-5.34 +/- 5.42 dB,-4.14 +/- 5.29 dB; P = 0.03,成对t -测试)。两种设备之间的PSD没有显着差异(P = 0.78,配对t检验)。与SITA相比,发现的基质缺陷明显更小(P = 0.005,Wilcoxon检验)和更深(P <0.001,Wilcoxon检验)。在先前具有SAP经验的亚组中观察到了相似的结果。结论:矩阵检查未发现36%的异常SITA视野。基质场缺陷比SITA视野仪中出现的缺陷更小,更深。

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