
This study examined how FASTPAC, a fast strategy for the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA), compares to the standard 4/2-dB full threshold strategy in patients with glaucoma.The author tested one eye each of 50 patients with glaucoma (23 with only relative defects, 27 with at least one absolute defect; age range, 25 to 79 years; median age, 61.5 years) with both strategies using program 30-2 of the HFA (stimulus size III). Global visual field indices as calculated by Statpac, unweighted mean sensitivity, and examination time were compared. In addition, a point by point analysis of the sensitivity values was performed.Between the two strategies, no significant differences were found for indices directly related to the sensitivity values (mean sensitivity [MS], mean deviation [MD]) or for the actual thresholds. For the entire population, FASTPAC showed higher mean short-term fluctuation (SF; P = 0.018), lower mean pattern standard deviation (PSD; P = 0.006), and mean corrected PSD (CPSD; P 0.70, P 0.030).FASTPAC provides a considerable time reduction at the cost of higher threshold fluctuation. This may lead to problems in detecting relative defects or changes in differential light threshold in follow-up examinations.
Adult, Vision Disorders, Glaucoma, Middle Aged, Sensitivity and Specificity, Sensory Thresholds, Linear Models, Humans, Visual Field Tests, Visual Fields, Algorithms, Aged
Adult, Vision Disorders, Glaucoma, Middle Aged, Sensitivity and Specificity, Sensory Thresholds, Linear Models, Humans, Visual Field Tests, Visual Fields, Algorithms, Aged
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 31 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
