Patel, DE;
Cumberland, PM;
Walters, BC;
Russell-Eggitt, I;
Brookes, J;
Papadopoulos, M;
Khaw, PT;
... Optimal Perimetric Testing in Children (OPTIC) study group, .; + view all
(2018)
Comparison of Quality and Output of Different Optimal Perimetric Testing Approaches in Children With Glaucoma.
JAMA Ophthalmology
, 136
(2)
pp. 155-161.
10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.5898.
![[thumbnail of Patel_OPTIC Glaucoma_DEP_MCB_PC_TGH_PK_MP_JB_BW_011117_REVISED_CLEAN.pdf]](https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/style/images/fileicons/text.png) |
Text
Patel_OPTIC Glaucoma_DEP_MCB_PC_TGH_PK_MP_JB_BW_011117_REVISED_CLEAN.pdf - Accepted Version Access restricted to UCL open access staff Download (311kB) |
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: There is limited evidence to support the development of guidance for visual field testing in children with glaucoma. Objective: To compare different static and combined static/kinetic perimetry approaches in children with glaucoma. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional, observational study recruiting children prospectively between May 2013 and June 2015 at 2 tertiary specialist pediatric ophthalmology centers in London, England (Moorfields Eye Hospital and Great Ormond Street Hospital). The study included 65 children aged 5 to 15 years with glaucoma (108 affected eyes). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: A comparison of test quality and outcomes for static and combined static/kinetic techniques, with respect to ability to quantify glaucomatous loss. Children performed perimetric assessments using Humphrey static (Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm 24-2 FAST) and Octopus combined static tendency-oriented perimetry/kinetic perimetry (isopter V4e, III4e, or I4e) in a single sitting, using standardized clinical protocols, administered by a single examiner. Information was collected about test duration, completion, and quality (using automated reliability indices and our qualitative Examiner-Based Assessment of Reliability score). Perimetry outputs were scored using the Aulhorn and Karmeyer classification. One affected eye in 19 participants was retested with Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm 24-2 FAST and 24-2 standard algorithms. RESULTS: Sixty-five children (33 girls [50.8%]), with a median age of 12 years (interquartile range, 9-14 years), were tested. Test quality (Examiner-Based Assessment of Reliability score) improved with increasing age for both Humphrey and Octopus strategies and were equivalent in children older than 10 years (McNemar test, χ2 = 0.33; P = .56), but better-quality tests with Humphrey perimetry were achieved in younger children (McNemar test, χ2 = 4.0; P = .05). Octopus and Humphrey static MD values worse than or equal to -6 dB showed disagreement (Bland-Altman, mean difference, -0.70; limit of agreement, -7.74 to 6.35) but were comparable when greater than this threshold (mean difference, -0.03; limit of agreement, -2.33 to 2.27). Visual field classification scores for static perimetry tests showed substantial agreement (linearly weighted κ, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65-0.93), although 25 of 80 (31%) were graded with a more severe defect for Octopus static perimetry. Of the 7 severe cases of visual field loss (grade 5), 5 had lower kinetic than static classification scores. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A simple static perimetry approach potentially yields high-quality results in children younger than 10 years. For children older than 10 years, without penalizing quality, the addition of kinetic perimetry enabled measurement of far-peripheral sensitivity, which is particularly useful in children with severe visual field restriction.
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
