Original articleSix-month Longitudinal Comparison of a Portable Tablet Perimeter With the Humphrey Field Analyzer
Section snippets
Methods
The clinical trials reported in this manuscript were undertaken with approval of the local ethics committees (Integrated Research Application System IRAS ID: 204698: West of Scotland Research Ethics Service REC No: 16/WS/0130: and AIIMS IEC-564/03.11.2017) and were conducted in accordance with the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki, with all subjects giving informed consent prior to participation. This clinical trial has been registered as ISRCTN77744218 at //doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN77744218
Results
Figure 2 shows representative field results for 2 patients measured with the MRF and HFA SITA-standard test. The left panels are MRF outcomes for a patient having mild (Figure 2, Upper left) and moderate (Figure 2, Lower left) visual field loss, whereas the right panels show the corresponding HFA outcomes for the same patients, with key statistics indicated beside each panel.
The test times for MRF, SITA-fast, and SITA-standard are shown as box- and wisker plots in Figure 3. The MRF required 4.6
Discussion
In this study, we demonstrate that, over a 6-month period, the MRF provides a reliable and repeatable estimate of HFA MD (SITA-standard and SITA-fast) within a test time that approximates that of the SITA-fast logic. This is despite the greater number of test spots (with more spots in the macular region), the different test spot locations, the variable size of the spot, the different procedures used to determine threshold, and the need for fixation changes during the test. We find the test time
References (18)
- et al.
Performance of an iPad application to detect moderate and advanced visual field loss in Nepal
Am J Ophthalmol
(2017) - et al.
Can home monitoring allow earlier detection of rapid visual field progression in glaucoma?
Ophthalmology
(2017) - et al.
Efficient and unbiased modifications of the QUEST threshold method: theory, simulations, experimental evaluation and practical implementation
Vision Res
(1994) - et al.
Current practice with standard automated perimetry
Semin Ophthalmol
(2000) - et al.
Detecting glaucoma with a portable brain-computer interface for objective assessment of visual function loss
JAMA Ophthalmol
(2017) - et al.
Visual field testing with head-mounted perimeter ‘imo.’
PLoS One
(2016) - et al.
A portable platform for evaluation of visual performance in glaucoma patients
PLoS One
(2015) - et al.
Comparison of Damato campimetry and Humphrey automated perimetry results in a clinical population
Br J Ophthalmol
(2010) - et al.
Comparison of advanced visual field defects measured with the Tubingen Mobile Campimeter and the Octopus 101 perimeter
Eur J Ophthalmol
(2010)
Cited by (55)
At-Home Glaucoma Monitoring: Is it Ready for Prime Time?
2023, Ophthalmology GlaucomaChallenges and impact of COVID-19 lockdown on Indian optometry practice: A survey-based study
2022, Journal of OptometryCitation Excerpt :However, advanced technology is not the only mode of improving teleconsultation; revamp in history taking through the use of validated questionnaires or adapting patient-reported outcome measures may enhance patient care.27 There are a few other vision-related applications that show promising outcomes, for example, for the assessment of contrast sensitivity,28 manifest and latent deviations,29 and visual field screening.30–32 At the same time, the majority remain unvalidated for clinical use.33
Technology Considerations for Implementing an Eye Telehealth Program
2022, Ocular Telehealth: A Practical GuideVirtual reality headsets for perimetry testing: a systematic review
2024, Eye (Basingstoke)Assessment of visual function using mobile Apps
2024, Eye (Basingstoke)
Y.X. George Kong is now located at Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, East Melbourne, Australia.