Ophthalmology. Glaucoma · 2022
Diagnostic Accuracy of Frequency-Doubling Technology and the Moorfields Motion Displacement Test for Glaucoma.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Richardson Quintin R, Kumar Rajesh S, Ramgopal Balu, Rackenchath Mahalakshmi V, A V Sathi Devi, Mannil Suria S, Nagaraj Sriharsha, Moe Caitlin A, Wittberg Dionna M, O'Brien Kieran S, Oatts Julius T, Stamper Robert L, Keenan Jeremy D
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Portable perimetric testing could be useful for community-based glaucoma screening programs. Frequency-doubling technology (FDT) and the Moorfields motion displacement test (MDT) are portable perimeters that have shown promise as potential screening tools for glaucoma. This study's goal was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of FDT and MDT for visual field defects and glaucoma.
DESIGN: Prospective, cross-sectional, diagnostic accuracy study.
PARTICIPANTS: A consecutive series of patients aged ≥ 50 years who presented to a glaucoma clinic in South India and had never undergone Humphrey field analyzer (HFA) visual field testing in the past.
METHODS: Participants underwent 24-2 Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA) Standard HFA perimetry, FDT perimetry, MDT perimetry, and iPad perimetry using visualFields Easy in random order. Ophthalmologist grades of HFA and optic nerve head photographs were used as reference standards for glaucoma and field defect presence. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of various parameters for each test.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).
RESULTS: Overall, 292 eyes from 173 participants were included, with 112 eyes classified as moderate or worse glaucoma. For moderate or worse glaucoma detection, the best parameter on FDT was mean deviation (MD) (AUROC, 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79-0.89) and the best parameter on MDT was global probability of true damage (GPTD) (AUROC, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.82-0.91). When specificity was set to 90%, the sensitivity for detection of moderate or worse glaucoma was 55% (95% CI, 39%-68%) for FDT MD and 62% (95% CI 52%-71%) for MDT GPTD.
CONCLUSIONS: Frequency-doubling technology and MDT perimetry had fair diagnostic accuracy for glaucoma detection when administered to naïve test takers in this South Indian population. Although not appropriate for use as a sole glaucoma screening test, these perimetric tests may be useful as ancillary tests.
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.
DESIGN: Prospective, cross-sectional, diagnostic accuracy study.
PARTICIPANTS: A consecutive series of patients aged ≥ 50 years who presented to a glaucoma clinic in South India and had never undergone Humphrey field analyzer (HFA) visual field testing in the past.
METHODS: Participants underwent 24-2 Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA) Standard HFA perimetry, FDT perimetry, MDT perimetry, and iPad perimetry using visualFields Easy in random order. Ophthalmologist grades of HFA and optic nerve head photographs were used as reference standards for glaucoma and field defect presence. Receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of various parameters for each test.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).
RESULTS: Overall, 292 eyes from 173 participants were included, with 112 eyes classified as moderate or worse glaucoma. For moderate or worse glaucoma detection, the best parameter on FDT was mean deviation (MD) (AUROC, 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79-0.89) and the best parameter on MDT was global probability of true damage (GPTD) (AUROC, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.82-0.91). When specificity was set to 90%, the sensitivity for detection of moderate or worse glaucoma was 55% (95% CI, 39%-68%) for FDT MD and 62% (95% CI 52%-71%) for MDT GPTD.
CONCLUSIONS: Frequency-doubling technology and MDT perimetry had fair diagnostic accuracy for glaucoma detection when administered to naïve test takers in this South Indian population. Although not appropriate for use as a sole glaucoma screening test, these perimetric tests may be useful as ancillary tests.
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.