Comparison of analytic algorithms for detecting glaucomatous visual field loss

J. Katz, A. Sommer, D. E. Gaasterland and D. R. Anderson
Dana Center for Preventive Ophthalmology, Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.

The sensitivity and specificity of alternate analytic strategies for recognizing glaucomatous visual field loss from automated threshold perimetry (C-30-2 test of the Humphrey Field Analyzer) were compared among one eye each of 106 patients with glaucoma and 249 normal subjects. Algorithms included commercially available global indexes and cross-meridional differences (Statpac 1 and Statpac 2), as well as cross-meridional and cluster analyses that were developed independently for natural history studies and clinical trials. The sensitivity of most algorithms was high, except for those that used only diffuse loss as an indicator of abnormality. Specificity was acceptably high for all algorithms. Subjects who failed to meet the manufacturer's standard for reliability had much reduced specificity, but sensitivity was also affected. Algorithms that were based on any of the alternate definitions of localized reduction in retinal sensitivity performed equally well, which suggests that any of these approaches is useful in searching for glaucomatous visual loss as typified by this database. Availability, familiarity, and convenience may govern the selection of any one analytic approach for use in a particular setting.

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

An unexpectedly low Stratus optical coherence tomography false-positive rate in the non-nasal quadrants of Asian eyes: indirect evidence of differing retinal nerve fibre layer thickness profiles according to ethnicity
Kim et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2008;92:735-739.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Retinal nerve fibre thickness measured with optical coherence tomography accurately detects confirmed glaucomatous damage
Hood et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2007;91:905-907.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Ability of Stratus OCT to Identify Localized Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Defects in Patients with Normal Standard Automated Perimetry Results
Kim et al.
IOVS 2007;48:1635-1641.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A Multicenter, Retrospective Pilot Study of Resource Use and Costs Associated With Severity of Disease in Glaucoma
Lee et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124:12-19.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Effects of Input Data on the Performance of a Neural Network in Distinguishing Normal and Glaucomatous Visual Fields
Bengtsson et al.
IOVS 2005;46:3730-3736.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Direct costs of glaucoma and severity of the disease: a multinational long term study of resource utilisation in Europe
Traverso et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2005;89:1245-1249.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The Pattern Electroretinogram in Glaucoma Patients with Confirmed Visual Field Deficits
Hood et al.
IOVS 2005;46:2411-2418.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Pseudoexfoliation in Southern India: The Andhra Pradesh Eye Disease Study
Thomas et al.
IOVS 2005;46:1170-1176.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Interpreting the multifocal visual evoked potential: the effects of refractive errors, cataracts, and fixation errors
Winn et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2005;89:340-344.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Detecting Early to Mild Glaucomatous Damage: A Comparison of the Multifocal VEP and Automated Perimetry
Hood et al.
IOVS 2004;45:492-498.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Increased Detection Rate of Glaucomatous Visual Field Damage With Locally Condensed Grids: A Comparison Between Fundus-Oriented Perimetry and Conventional Visual Field Examination
Schiefer et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2003;121:458-465.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Comparison of Glaucomatous Visual Field Defects Using Standard Full Threshold and Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithms
Budenz et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120:1136-1141.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Spatial and Temporal Processing of Threshold Data for Detection of Progressive Glaucomatous Visual Field Loss
Spry et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120:173-180.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Discrimination between normal and glaucomatous eyes with visual field and scanning laser polarimetry measurements
Lauande-Pimentel et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2001;85:586-591.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study, 6: Effect of Cataract on Visual Field and Visual Acuity
AGIS Investigators
Arch Ophthalmol 2000;118:1639-1652.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Number of Ganglion Cells in Glaucoma Eyes Compared with Threshold Visual Field Tests in the Same Persons
Kerrigan–Baumrind et al.
IOVS 2000;41:741-748.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Ganglion Cell Losses Underlying Visual Field Defects from Experimental Glaucoma
Harwerth et al.
IOVS 1999;40:2242-2250.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Methodological Variations in Estimating Apparent Progressive Visual Field Loss in Clinical Trials of Glaucoma Treatment
Katz et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 1999;117:1137-1142.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Clinical evaluation of scanning laser polarimetry: II Polar profile shape analysis
Waldock et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 1998;82:260-266.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Open-Angle Glaucoma
Quigley
NEJM 1993;328:1097-1106.
FULL TEXT