Comparison of Swedish interactive threshold algorithm and full threshold algorithm for glaucomatous visual field loss.
- 1 March 2007
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in European Journal of Ophthalmology
- Vol. 17 (2), 196-202
- https://doi.org/10.1177/112067210701700208
Abstract
Purpose To compare the prevalence of visual field loss, the sensitivity distribution, and the size and depth of glaucomatous visual field defects using the standard full threshold (FT) and the Swedish interactive threshold algorithm (SITA) standard (SS) procedures in patients with early or suspected glaucoma. Methods Automated perimetry findings were retrospectively evaluated in 53 patients (105 eyes) with early or suspected glaucoma. Results The number of eyes judged to have glaucomatous visual field loss by SS (48 eyes) was significantly larger than what was found with FT (35 eyes), and 70 eyes were classified as pre-perimetric glaucoma. In these 70 eyes, there were many locations where the sensitivity was significantly higher with SS than with FT (intrasubject difference), and SS had less intersubject variability than FT at most locations. The cumulative decibel scores at the region of glaucomatous defects were larger with SS (206.2±103.3 dB) than with FT (162.1±87.5 dB) (p=0.02), which indicated that the depth of defects measured by SS was shallower than that by FT. The sizes of defects were significantly larger with SS (11.2±5.6) than with FT (9.7±5.1) (p<0.05). Conclusions Glaucomatous defects were measured as being significantly shallower and larger with SS than with FT. In addition, the prevalence of visual field defect was higher with SS according to some of the criteria for glaucomatous visual field defects. These results might be related to the fact that SS strategy has a lower variability and to the Bayesian statistical properties of the SITA algorithm. (Eur J Ophthalmol 2007; 17: 196–202)Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- Properties of Perimetric Threshold Estimates from Full Threshold, ZEST, and SITA-like Strategies, as Determined by Computer SimulationPublished by Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO) ,2003
- Full-threshold versus Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) in normal individuals undergoing automated perimetry for the first timeOphthalmology, 2002
- Comparison of Glaucomatous Visual Field Defects Using Standard Full Threshold and Swedish Interactive Threshold AlgorithmsAmerican Journal of Ophthalmology, 2002
- Sensitivity and specificity of the swedish interactive threshold algorithm for glaucomatous visual field defectsOphthalmology, 2002
- Glaucoma follow-up when converting from long to short perimetric threshold tests.American Journal of Ophthalmology, 2000
- Comparison of the Humphrey Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA) and Full Threshold StrategiesJournal of Glaucoma, 2000
- A New Look at Threshold Estimation Algorithms for Automated Static PerimetryOptometry and Vision Science, 1999
- Inter‐subject variability and normal limits of the SITA Standard, SITA Fast, and the Humphrey Full Threshold computerized perimetry strategies, SITA STATPACActa Ophthalmologica Scandinavica, 1999
- Evaluation of a new threshold visual field strategy, SITA, in normal subjectsActa Ophthalmologica Scandinavica, 1998
- Fatigue effects in automated perimetryApplied Optics, 1988