Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology 11/2007

Open Access 01-11-2007 | Clinical Investigation

Progression detection in glaucoma can be made more efficient by using a variable interval between successive visual field tests

Author: Nomdo M. Jansonius

Published in: Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology | Issue 11/2007

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

This study aimed to gain insight into the optimal spacing in time for visual field tests for progression detection in glaucoma.

Methods

Three perimetric strategies for progression detection were compared by means of simulation experiments in a theoretical cohort. In strategies 1 and 2, visual field testing was performed with fixed-spaced inter-test intervals, using intervals of 3 and 6 months respectively. In strategy 3, the inter-test interval was kept at 1 year as long as the fields appeared unchanged. Then, as soon as progression was suspected, confirmation or falsification were performed promptly. Follow-up fields were compared against a baseline assuming linear deterioration, using various progression criteria. Outcome measures were: (1) specificity, (2) time delay until the diagnosis of definite progression, and (3) number of required tests.

Results

Strategies 2 and 3 had a higher specificity than strategy 1. Strategies 1 and 3 detected progression earlier than strategy 2. The number of required visual field tests was lowest for strategy 3.

Conclusion

Perimetry in glaucoma can be optimised by postponing the next test under apparently stable field conditions and bringing the next test forward once progression is suspected.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Viswanathan AC, Hitchings RA, Fitzke FW (1997) How often do patients need visual field tests? Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 235:563–568PubMedCrossRef Viswanathan AC, Hitchings RA, Fitzke FW (1997) How often do patients need visual field tests? Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 235:563–568PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Gardiner SK, Crabb DP (2002) Frequency of testing for detecting visual field progression. Br J Ophthalmol 86:560–564PubMedCrossRef Gardiner SK, Crabb DP (2002) Frequency of testing for detecting visual field progression. Br J Ophthalmol 86:560–564PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference European Glaucoma Society (2003) Terminology and guidelines for glaucoma, 2nd edn. Dogma, Savona European Glaucoma Society (2003) Terminology and guidelines for glaucoma, 2nd edn. Dogma, Savona
4.
go back to reference Jansonius NM (2006) Towards an optimal perimetric strategy for progression detection in glaucoma: from fixed-space to adaptive inter-test intervals. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 244:390–393PubMedCrossRef Jansonius NM (2006) Towards an optimal perimetric strategy for progression detection in glaucoma: from fixed-space to adaptive inter-test intervals. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 244:390–393PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Jansonius NM (2005) Bayes’ theorem applied to perimetric progression detection in glaucoma: from specificity to positive predictive value. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 243:433–437PubMedCrossRef Jansonius NM (2005) Bayes’ theorem applied to perimetric progression detection in glaucoma: from specificity to positive predictive value. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 243:433–437PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Mikelberg FS, Schulzer M, Drance SM, Lau W (1986) The rate of progression of scotomas in glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 101:1–6PubMed Mikelberg FS, Schulzer M, Drance SM, Lau W (1986) The rate of progression of scotomas in glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 101:1–6PubMed
7.
go back to reference McNaught AI, Crabb DP, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA (1995) Modelling series of visual fields to detect progression in normal-tension glaucoma. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 233:750–755PubMedCrossRef McNaught AI, Crabb DP, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA (1995) Modelling series of visual fields to detect progression in normal-tension glaucoma. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 233:750–755PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Smith SD, Katz J, Quigley HA (1996) Analysis of progressive change in automated visual fields in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 37:1419–1428PubMed Smith SD, Katz J, Quigley HA (1996) Analysis of progressive change in automated visual fields in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 37:1419–1428PubMed
9.
go back to reference AGIS investigators (1994) Advanced glaucoma intervention study 2: visual field test scoring and reliability. Ophthalmology 101:1445–1455 AGIS investigators (1994) Advanced glaucoma intervention study 2: visual field test scoring and reliability. Ophthalmology 101:1445–1455
10.
go back to reference Heijl A, Lindgren G, Olsson J (1986) A package for the statistical analysis of visual fields. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser 49:153–168 Heijl A, Lindgren G, Olsson J (1986) A package for the statistical analysis of visual fields. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser 49:153–168
11.
go back to reference Katz J, Congdon N, Friedman DS (1999) Methodological variations in estimating apparent progressive visual field loss in clinical trials of glaucoma treatment. Arch Ophthalmol 117:1137–1142PubMed Katz J, Congdon N, Friedman DS (1999) Methodological variations in estimating apparent progressive visual field loss in clinical trials of glaucoma treatment. Arch Ophthalmol 117:1137–1142PubMed
12.
go back to reference Vesti E, Johnson CA, Chauhan BC (2003) Comparison of different methods for detecting glaucomatous visual field progression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 44:3873–3879PubMedCrossRef Vesti E, Johnson CA, Chauhan BC (2003) Comparison of different methods for detecting glaucomatous visual field progression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 44:3873–3879PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Heijl A, Leske MC, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Bengtsson B, Hussein M, EMGT group (2002) Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression. Arch Ophthalmol 120:1268–1279PubMed Heijl A, Leske MC, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Bengtsson B, Hussein M, EMGT group (2002) Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression. Arch Ophthalmol 120:1268–1279PubMed
14.
go back to reference Leske MC, Heijl A, Hussein M, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Komaroff E, EMGT group (2003) Factors for glaucoma progression and the effect of treatment: the early manifest glaucoma trial. Arch Ophthalmol 121:48–56PubMed Leske MC, Heijl A, Hussein M, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Komaroff E, EMGT group (2003) Factors for glaucoma progression and the effect of treatment: the early manifest glaucoma trial. Arch Ophthalmol 121:48–56PubMed
Metadata
Title
Progression detection in glaucoma can be made more efficient by using a variable interval between successive visual field tests
Author
Nomdo M. Jansonius
Publication date
01-11-2007
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology / Issue 11/2007
Print ISSN: 0721-832X
Electronic ISSN: 1435-702X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-007-0576-7

Other articles of this Issue 11/2007

Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology 11/2007 Go to the issue