Journal of glaucoma · 2023
What is the Optimal Frequency of Visual Field Testing to Detect Rapid Progression Among Hypertensive Eyes?
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Melchior Bruna, De Moraes C Gustavo, Paula Jayter S, Cioffi George A, Gordon Mae O, Kass Michael A, Liebmann Jeffrey M
Аннотация
PRÉCIS: We evaluated 16,351 visual field (VF) tests from Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS) database and showed that more frequent testing resulted in a shorter time to detect glaucoma progression, with the best trade-off being the 6-month intervals for high-risk and 12 months for low-risk patients.
PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of different testing intervals on time to detect visual field progression in eyes with ocular hypertension.
METHODS: A total of 16,351 reliable 30-2 VF tests from 1575 eyes of the OHTS-1 observation arm with a mean (95% CI) follow-up of 4.8 (4.7-4.8) years were analyzed. Computer simulations (n = 10,000 eyes) based on mean deviation values and the residuals of risk groups (according to their baseline 5 y risk of developing primary open angle glaucoma: low, medium, and high risk) were performed to estimate time to detect progression with testing intervals of 4, 6, 12, and 24 months using linear regression. The time to detect VF progression ( P < 5%) at 80% power was calculated based on the mean deviation slope of -0.42 dB/year. We assessed the time to detect a -3 dB loss as an estimate of clinically meaningful perimetric loss.
RESULTS: At 80% power, based on the progression of -0.42 dB/year, the best trade-off to detect significant rates of VF change to clinically meaningful perimetric loss in high, medium, and low-risk patients was 6, 6, and 12-month intervals, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Given the importance of not missing the conversion to glaucoma, the frequency of testing used in OHTS (6 mo) was optimal for the detection of progression in high-risk patients. Low-risk patients could potentially be tested every 12 months to optimize resource utilization.
PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of different testing intervals on time to detect visual field progression in eyes with ocular hypertension.
METHODS: A total of 16,351 reliable 30-2 VF tests from 1575 eyes of the OHTS-1 observation arm with a mean (95% CI) follow-up of 4.8 (4.7-4.8) years were analyzed. Computer simulations (n = 10,000 eyes) based on mean deviation values and the residuals of risk groups (according to their baseline 5 y risk of developing primary open angle glaucoma: low, medium, and high risk) were performed to estimate time to detect progression with testing intervals of 4, 6, 12, and 24 months using linear regression. The time to detect VF progression ( P < 5%) at 80% power was calculated based on the mean deviation slope of -0.42 dB/year. We assessed the time to detect a -3 dB loss as an estimate of clinically meaningful perimetric loss.
RESULTS: At 80% power, based on the progression of -0.42 dB/year, the best trade-off to detect significant rates of VF change to clinically meaningful perimetric loss in high, medium, and low-risk patients was 6, 6, and 12-month intervals, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Given the importance of not missing the conversion to glaucoma, the frequency of testing used in OHTS (6 mo) was optimal for the detection of progression in high-risk patients. Low-risk patients could potentially be tested every 12 months to optimize resource utilization.