comparative study of computerised automated versus manual perimetry

ABSTRACT

One thousand and foully manual and automated visual fields have been studied and analyzed. Eight hundred and ten manual kinetic visual fields were performed on the Goldmann projection perimeter and the B. and L. Tangent Autoplot perimeter; while two hundred and thirty tests were conducted using the Dicon 200 computerised autoperimeter. One hundred and eighty fields were conducted on patients using both manual and automated perimetry at the same sitting. It was found that reliable reproducable field could be obtained with computerised perimetry in an accurate way, highly comparable to the standared manual perimetry