UCL Discovery
UCL home » Library Services » Electronic resources » UCL Discovery

Visual Field Endpoints Based on Subgroups of Points may be Useful in Glaucoma Clinical Trials - A Study with the Humphrey Field Analyzer and the Compass perimeter

Barkana, Y; Leshno, A; Stern, O; Singer, R; Russ, H; Oddone, F; Lanzetta, P; ... Skaat, A; + view all (2021) Visual Field Endpoints Based on Subgroups of Points may be Useful in Glaucoma Clinical Trials - A Study with the Humphrey Field Analyzer and the Compass perimeter. Journal of Glaucoma 10.1097/IJG.0000000000001856. (In press).

[thumbnail of Visual_Field_Endpoints_Based_on_Subgroups_of.97593.pdf] Text
Visual_Field_Endpoints_Based_on_Subgroups_of.97593.pdf - Accepted Version
Access restricted to UCL open access staff until 24 April 2022.

Download (960kB)

Abstract

PRECIS: Visual field endpoints based on average deviation of specific subsets of points rather than all points may offer a more homogenous dataset without necessarily worsening test-retest variability and so may be useful in clinical trials. PURPOSE: To characterize outcome measures encompassing particular subsets of visual field points and compare them as obtained with Humphrey (HVF) and Compass perimeters. METHODS: 30 patients with imaging-based glaucomatous neuropathy performed a pair of 24-2 tests with each of 2 perimeters. Non-weighted mean deviation (MD) was calculated for the whole field and separate vertical hemifields, and again after censoring of points with low sensitivity (MDc) and subsequently including only "abnormal" points with total deviation probability of <5% (MDc5%) or <2% (MDc2%). Test-retest variability was assessed using Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement (95%LoA). RESULTS: For the whole field, using HVF, MD was -7.5±6.9▒dB, MDc -3.6±2.8▒dB, MDc5% -6.4±1.7▒dB and MDc2% -7.3±1.5▒dB. With Compass MD was -7.5±6.6, MDc -2.9±1.7▒dB, MDc5% -6.3±1.5, and MDC2% -7.9±1.6. The respective 95% LoA were 5.5, 5.3, 4.6 and 5.6 with HVF, and 4.8, 3.7, 7.1 and 7.1 with Compass. The respective number of eligible points were 52, 42±12, 20±11 and 15±9 with HVF, and 52, 41.2±12.6, 10±7 and 7±5 with Compass. With both machines, standard deviation (SD) and 95%LoA increased in hemifields compared to the total field, but this increase was mitigated after censoring. CONCLUSIONS: Restricting analysis to particular subsets of points of interest in the visual field after censoring points with low sensitivity, as compared with using the familiar total field mean deviation, can provide outcome measures with a broader range of mean deviation, a markedly reduced SD and therefore more homogenous dataset, without necessarily worsening test-retest variability.

Type: Article
Title: Visual Field Endpoints Based on Subgroups of Points may be Useful in Glaucoma Clinical Trials - A Study with the Humphrey Field Analyzer and the Compass perimeter
Location: United States
DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000001856
Publisher version: http://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0000000000001856
Language: English
Additional information: This version is the author accepted manuscript. For information on re-use, please refer to the publisher’s terms and conditions.
UCL classification: UCL
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Brain Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Brain Sciences > Institute of Ophthalmology
URI: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10128638
Downloads since deposit
1Download
Download activity - last month
Download activity - last 12 months
Downloads by country - last 12 months

Archive Staff Only

View Item View Item