Ophthalmology · 2000
Correlation between static automated and scanning laser entoptic perimetry in normal subjects and glaucoma patients.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка службы здравоохранения 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.
Plummer D J, Lopez A, Azen S P, LaBree L, Bartsch D U, Sadun A A, Freeman W R
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of scanning laser entoptic perimetry with static automated perimetry as a noninvasive instrument for screening for glaucomatous damage in visually asymptomatic subjects within the central 60 degrees (diameter) of vision.
DESIGN: A masked cross-sectional study comparing entoptic perimetry to achromatic threshold perimetry.
PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-three subjects and controls from the Sharp Rees-Stealy Hospital and the Shiley Eye Center at the University of California, San Diego.
TESTING: Virtual reality-based entoptic perimetry was compared with achromatic threshold perimetry.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: For each testing session, we compared the presence of a disturbance in the entoptic perimetry stimulus with the presence of defects in visual function as measured by Humphrey automated visual field perimetry.
RESULTS: Scanning laser entoptic perimetry reasonably estimates the overall visual field loss for moderate-to-severe scotomas as measured by the pattern deviation in standard visual field perimetry. Scanning laser entoptic perimetry has a sensitivity from 27% to 90% and a specificity from 50% to 100% for screening moderate-to-severe visual field defects caused by glaucoma within the central 60 degrees diameter of vision.
CONCLUSIONS: Scanning laser entoptic perimetry may be an effective and inexpensive screening test in hospitals and community clinics for diagnosing visual field loss caused by glaucoma.
DESIGN: A masked cross-sectional study comparing entoptic perimetry to achromatic threshold perimetry.
PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-three subjects and controls from the Sharp Rees-Stealy Hospital and the Shiley Eye Center at the University of California, San Diego.
TESTING: Virtual reality-based entoptic perimetry was compared with achromatic threshold perimetry.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: For each testing session, we compared the presence of a disturbance in the entoptic perimetry stimulus with the presence of defects in visual function as measured by Humphrey automated visual field perimetry.
RESULTS: Scanning laser entoptic perimetry reasonably estimates the overall visual field loss for moderate-to-severe scotomas as measured by the pattern deviation in standard visual field perimetry. Scanning laser entoptic perimetry has a sensitivity from 27% to 90% and a specificity from 50% to 100% for screening moderate-to-severe visual field defects caused by glaucoma within the central 60 degrees diameter of vision.
CONCLUSIONS: Scanning laser entoptic perimetry may be an effective and inexpensive screening test in hospitals and community clinics for diagnosing visual field loss caused by glaucoma.