[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
March 1993

Evaluation of Baseline-Related Suprathreshold Testing for Quick Determination of Visual Field Nonprogression

Author Affiliations

From the Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Miami (Fla) School of Medicine. Dr Araujo is now with Centro Medico Imbanaco, Cali, Colombia.

Arch Ophthalmol. 1993;111(3):365-369. doi:10.1001/archopht.1993.01090030083044
Abstract

• Objective.  —To evaluate a commercially available means of baseline-related suprathreshold examination designed to detect visual field worsening.

Design.  —Patients for whom results of a baseline series of static-threshold visual field examinations were available underwent both a second static-threshold examination (full-threshold strategy; average time, 15 minutes) and a baseline-related suprathreshold examination ("fast-threshold" strategy; average time, 5 minutes).

Results.  —Most of the 1702 points examined were apparently unchanged from baseline, showing with either method only the degree of variation expected from the measurement inconsistency (short-term fluctuation). For points that did show a change, the changes shown by the two methods were correlated. Change in the field as a whole, represented by a cluster of locations showing deterioration, was evident more frequently with the standard testing strategy: 11 of 37 field examinations showed deterioration by both methods and an additional 11 examinations showed deterioration by the full-threshold method only.

Conclusions.  —Each examination method identified pointwise changes not detected by the other, the combined effect of false-positive errors (imperfect specificity) and false-negative errors (imperfect sensitivity) with each of the two methods. The findings relating to clusters could represent a better sensitivity of the full-threshold method in detecting visual field deterioration, a better specificity of the suprathreshold method, or both.

×