Limits...
Comparison of Humphrey MATRIX and Swedish interactive threshold algorithm standard strategy in detecting early glaucomatous visual field loss.

Prema R, George R, Hemamalini A, Sathyamangalam Ve R, Baskaran M, Vijaya L - Indian J Ophthalmol (2009 May-Jun)

Bottom Line: Only reliable fields, where the HFA results corresponded to the disc changes were considered for analysis.The test duration was significantly less on the MATRIX, mean difference in test duration was -81 +/- 81.3 sec ( p p = 0.55, p = 0.64 respectively) and a positive correlation coefficient of 0.63 and 0.72 respectively.The Humphrey MATRIX diagnoses were similar to established perimetric standards.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Vision Research Foundation, Sankara Nethralaya, Chennai, India.

ABSTRACT

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the Humphrey MATRIX visual field (frequency doubling technology threshold) and Swedish interactive threshold algorithm (SITA) standard strategy white on white perimetry in detecting glaucomatous visual field loss.

Material and methods: Twenty-eight adult subjects, diagnosed to have glaucoma at a tertiary eye care hospital, who fulfilled the inclusion criteria, were included in this prospective study. All subjects underwent a complete ophthalmic examination. Subjects with glaucomatous optic disc changes underwent repeat perimetric examination on the same day with the Humphrey visual field analyzer (HFA II) and Humphrey MATRIX, the order of testing being random. Only reliable fields, where the HFA results corresponded to the disc changes were considered for analysis. A cumulative defect depth in each hemifield in both HFA and MATRIX reports was calculated.

Results: Thirty-seven eyes of 24 subjects had reliable fields corresponding to optic disc changes. The mean age of the subjects was 56 +/- 12 years. There were 12 males and 12 females. The test duration was significantly less on the MATRIX, mean difference in test duration was -81 +/- 81.3 sec ( p p = 0.55, p = 0.64 respectively) and a positive correlation coefficient of 0.63 and 0.72 respectively. Poor agreement was found with the glaucoma hemifield test.

Conclusion: The Humphrey MATRIX takes less time in performing the test than SITA Standard and shows good correlation for mean deviation and pattern standard deviation. However, the glaucoma hemifield test showed poor agreement. The Humphrey MATRIX diagnoses were similar to established perimetric standards.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

The pattern standard deviation (PSD) showed a positive correlation (r = 0.7) between SITA standard and MATRIX. The regression equation for linear trend was: MATRIX PSD = 2.22 + 0.57 × HVF PSD, R2: 0.45
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2683443&req=5

Figure 0003: The pattern standard deviation (PSD) showed a positive correlation (r = 0.7) between SITA standard and MATRIX. The regression equation for linear trend was: MATRIX PSD = 2.22 + 0.57 × HVF PSD, R2: 0.45

Mentions: Thirty-seven (24 subjects) of 47 eyes (28 subjects) had reliable fields that corresponded to the optic disc changes. Data from 10 eyes were excluded from analysis, due to unreliable perimetric tests. Twenty-nine of the 37 eyes had early glaucoma and eight eyes had moderate glaucoma as classified with the HAP. There were 12 males and 12 females. The mean age of the subjects was 56 ± 12 years. Performance was reliable in the right eye for four subjects, in the left eye for seven subjects and in both the eyes in 13 subjects. Test duration was significantly longer with HFA (T(37) = 6.34, p<0.001) Table 1. The mean difference in test duration was −81 ± 81.3 sec (range, −37 to 317 sec). There was no significant difference noted in either the MD or PSD between the two instruments (Paired sample t test: T(37) = −1.48, p = 0.55, T(37) = 0.22, p = −0.71 respectively) Table 1. The MD [Fig. 2] and the PSD [Fig. 3] between the two instruments showed a significant positive correlation coefficient of 0.6 (95% CI: 0.40 to 0.79) and 0.7 (95% CI: 0.44 to 0.81) respectively. The cumulative defect depth showed a significant positive correlation of 0.7 (95% CI: 0.45 to 0.83) in the superior quadrant and 0.4 (95% CI: 0.17 to 0.61) in the inferior quadrant (Pearson's correlation coefficient: p = 0.045 and p = 0.334 respectively). The MATRIX showed denser defect depths in both hemifields. The cumulative threshold values on the MATRIX were lower by a mean value of 57.5 dB in the superior and 26.1 dB in the inferior hemifield.


Comparison of Humphrey MATRIX and Swedish interactive threshold algorithm standard strategy in detecting early glaucomatous visual field loss.

Prema R, George R, Hemamalini A, Sathyamangalam Ve R, Baskaran M, Vijaya L - Indian J Ophthalmol (2009 May-Jun)

The pattern standard deviation (PSD) showed a positive correlation (r = 0.7) between SITA standard and MATRIX. The regression equation for linear trend was: MATRIX PSD = 2.22 + 0.57 × HVF PSD, R2: 0.45
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2683443&req=5

Figure 0003: The pattern standard deviation (PSD) showed a positive correlation (r = 0.7) between SITA standard and MATRIX. The regression equation for linear trend was: MATRIX PSD = 2.22 + 0.57 × HVF PSD, R2: 0.45
Mentions: Thirty-seven (24 subjects) of 47 eyes (28 subjects) had reliable fields that corresponded to the optic disc changes. Data from 10 eyes were excluded from analysis, due to unreliable perimetric tests. Twenty-nine of the 37 eyes had early glaucoma and eight eyes had moderate glaucoma as classified with the HAP. There were 12 males and 12 females. The mean age of the subjects was 56 ± 12 years. Performance was reliable in the right eye for four subjects, in the left eye for seven subjects and in both the eyes in 13 subjects. Test duration was significantly longer with HFA (T(37) = 6.34, p<0.001) Table 1. The mean difference in test duration was −81 ± 81.3 sec (range, −37 to 317 sec). There was no significant difference noted in either the MD or PSD between the two instruments (Paired sample t test: T(37) = −1.48, p = 0.55, T(37) = 0.22, p = −0.71 respectively) Table 1. The MD [Fig. 2] and the PSD [Fig. 3] between the two instruments showed a significant positive correlation coefficient of 0.6 (95% CI: 0.40 to 0.79) and 0.7 (95% CI: 0.44 to 0.81) respectively. The cumulative defect depth showed a significant positive correlation of 0.7 (95% CI: 0.45 to 0.83) in the superior quadrant and 0.4 (95% CI: 0.17 to 0.61) in the inferior quadrant (Pearson's correlation coefficient: p = 0.045 and p = 0.334 respectively). The MATRIX showed denser defect depths in both hemifields. The cumulative threshold values on the MATRIX were lower by a mean value of 57.5 dB in the superior and 26.1 dB in the inferior hemifield.

Bottom Line: Only reliable fields, where the HFA results corresponded to the disc changes were considered for analysis.The test duration was significantly less on the MATRIX, mean difference in test duration was -81 +/- 81.3 sec ( p p = 0.55, p = 0.64 respectively) and a positive correlation coefficient of 0.63 and 0.72 respectively.The Humphrey MATRIX diagnoses were similar to established perimetric standards.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Vision Research Foundation, Sankara Nethralaya, Chennai, India.

ABSTRACT

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the Humphrey MATRIX visual field (frequency doubling technology threshold) and Swedish interactive threshold algorithm (SITA) standard strategy white on white perimetry in detecting glaucomatous visual field loss.

Material and methods: Twenty-eight adult subjects, diagnosed to have glaucoma at a tertiary eye care hospital, who fulfilled the inclusion criteria, were included in this prospective study. All subjects underwent a complete ophthalmic examination. Subjects with glaucomatous optic disc changes underwent repeat perimetric examination on the same day with the Humphrey visual field analyzer (HFA II) and Humphrey MATRIX, the order of testing being random. Only reliable fields, where the HFA results corresponded to the disc changes were considered for analysis. A cumulative defect depth in each hemifield in both HFA and MATRIX reports was calculated.

Results: Thirty-seven eyes of 24 subjects had reliable fields corresponding to optic disc changes. The mean age of the subjects was 56 +/- 12 years. There were 12 males and 12 females. The test duration was significantly less on the MATRIX, mean difference in test duration was -81 +/- 81.3 sec ( p p = 0.55, p = 0.64 respectively) and a positive correlation coefficient of 0.63 and 0.72 respectively. Poor agreement was found with the glaucoma hemifield test.

Conclusion: The Humphrey MATRIX takes less time in performing the test than SITA Standard and shows good correlation for mean deviation and pattern standard deviation. However, the glaucoma hemifield test showed poor agreement. The Humphrey MATRIX diagnoses were similar to established perimetric standards.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus