[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
May 1962


Author Affiliations

Suite 4, Apex Building Canon City, Colo.

Arch Ophthalmol. 1962;67(5):686-687. doi:10.1001/archopht.1962.00960020686030

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


To the Editor:  —Early diagnosis of glaucoma is of the utmost importance. However, some difficulty has arisen for the average ophthalmologist, not because of the increase in the number of diagnostic procedures, but because of the varying emphasis placed on individual procedures by authorities in the field. This is further complicated by the lack of uniformity in conducting the various tests and the fact that elements of a subjective nature are inherent in some of them.Perhaps this is the price that must be paid for advancement, but it has resulted in patients going from one physician to another only to be confused by the lack of agreement.Because of the insidious nature of early glaucoma, it is justifiable that presumptive evidence must necessarily play some part in the decision, but with a lack of unanimity that now exists, to the extent that it exists, the decision to treat presents

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview