AI Article Synopsis
- A study compared a new glaucoma testing method called German Adaptive Thresholding Estimation (GATE/GATE-i) with two existing methods, Full-Threshold (FT) and Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA) Standard.
- The research involved 60 participants, including those with diagnosed and suspected glaucoma, who were tested under randomized conditions across two sessions.
- Results indicated that GATE algorithms provided similar threshold results to FT and SITA but completed tests faster, making GATE a potentially more efficient option for glaucoma assessment.
Article Abstract
Purpose: A new, fast-threshold strategy, German Adaptive Thresholding Estimation (GATE/GATE-i), is compared to the full-threshold (FT) staircase and the Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA) Standard strategies. GATE-i is performed in the initial examination and GATE refers to the results in subsequent examinations.
Methods: Sixty subjects were recruited for participation in the study: 40 with manifest glaucoma, 10 with suspected glaucoma, and 10 with ocular hypertension. The subjects were evaluated by each threshold strategy on two separate sessions within 14 days in a randomized block design.
Results: SITA standard, GATE-i, and GATE thresholds were 1.2, 0.6, and 0.0 dB higher than FT. The SITA standard tended to have lower thresholds than those of FT, GATE-i, and GATE for the more positive thresholds, and also in the five seed locations. For FT, GATE-i, GATE, and SITA Standard, the standard deviations of thresholds between sessions were, respectively, 3.9, 4.5, 4.2, and 3.1 dB, test-retest reliabilities (Spearman's rank correlations) were 0.84, 0.76, 0.79, and 0.71, test-retest agreements as measured by the 95% reference interval of differences were -7.69 to 7.69, -8.76 to 9.00, -8.40 to 8.56, and -7.01 to 7.44 dB, and examination durations were 9.0, 5.7, 4.7, and 5.6 minutes. The test duration for SITA Standard increased with increasing glaucomatous loss.
Conclusions: The GATE algorithm achieves thresholds that are similar to those of FT and SITA Standard, with comparable accuracy, test-retest reliability, but with a shorter test duration than FT.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2867595 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/iovs.08-2229 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Enhancing Detection of Glaucoma Progression: Utility of 24-2 Visual Field Central Points vs. 10-2 Visual Fields.
Ophthalmol Glaucoma
November 2024
Glaucoma Division, Stein Eye Institute, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA. Electronic address:
Purpose: To test the hypothesis that a summary index derived from the central 12 points of the 24-2 visual field (MD12) could provide complementary information to that provided by the 24-2 visual field (VF) mean deviation (24-2 MD).
Design: Longitudinal observational study PARTICIPANTS: 125 eyes (125 patients) with central damage or moderate to severe glaucoma from the Advanced Glaucoma Progression Study with four or more pairs of 10-2 and 24-2 SITA standard VFs.
Methods: Baseline 10-2 and 24-2 VF dates were within six months, and the remaining pairs of VF tests were done in the same session.
Age, Sex, and Clinical Characteristics of Juvenile Open-Angle Glaucoma Patients in a Saudi Tertiary Hospital: A Retrospective Study of Surgical and Non-Surgical Outcomes.
Medicina (Kaunas)
September 2024
Department of Ophthalmology, College of Medicine, Jouf University, Sakaka 72388, Saudi Arabia.
: Juvenile Open Angle Glaucoma (JOAG) is a condition that presents peculiar issues because it starts at a very early age and, in the end, causes substantial vision loss. This study aimed to analyze the age and gender distribution and treatment outcomes in JOAG patients. We carried out a retrospective study at King Abdul Aziz University Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, from 2015 to 2022.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFStandard automated perimetry for glaucoma and diseases of the retina and visual pathways: current and future perspectives.
Prog Retin Eye Res
October 2024
School of Optometry and Vision Science, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, Australia; School of Medicine (Optometry), Deakin University, Waurn Ponds, VIC, Australia; College of Optometry, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA. Electronic address:
Article Synopsis
- Static automated perimetry (SAP) is a crucial technique for evaluating visual field function in conditions like glaucoma and age-related macular degeneration, although its basic methodology has remained largely unchanged since the 1980s.
- Ongoing research is aimed at addressing issues such as optimizing testing parameters, understanding the impact of subjective responses, and aligning structural and functional assessments for better defect detection.
- The manuscript will discuss psychophysical principles, propose frameworks for improving tests, and explore methods to enhance clinical outcomes by reconciling subjective responses with objective measurements.
Purpose: To compare two fast threshold strategies of visual field assessment: SITA-Fast (SF; Humphrey field analyser) and Elisar-Fast (EF; Advanced vision analyser) in patients with glaucoma.
Methods: In this cross-sectional observational study, of total 192 subjects, 138 subjects [150 eyes, 80 glaucoma subjects (91 eyes) and 58 healthy controls (59 eyes)] were analysed and included. Each subject underwent 24-2 EF and SF in randomized order with a minimum time interval of 1 hour between tests.
Visual field testing in glaucoma using the Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA).
Surv Ophthalmol
November 2024
School of Optometry and Vision Science, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, Australia; Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia; Centre for Eye Health, UNSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia. Electronic address:
Article Synopsis
- The Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA) is the primary method used for visual field assessments with the Humphrey Field Analyser, and the study compares the sensitivity and reliability of its three versions: SITA Standard (SS), Fast (SF), and Faster (SFR).
- The results show that while SFR gives similar sensitivity outputs to SS and SF, it may not be suitable for cases with severe visual field loss, and the study critiques the existing thresholds for measuring test reliability, especially concerning false positives.
- Additionally, the 24-2C test grid can help identify central visual field defects, while the 10-2 grid provides a more detailed assessment; the text also suggests
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!