ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To compare the results of the new strategy Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA) Faster to the results of SITA Standard in patients with glaucoma. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of 49 patients with glaucoma and previous experience with standard automated perimetry. Two consecutive tests were performed in random order, one with SITA Standard and another one with SITA Faster, in the studied eye of each patient. Comparisons were made for test time, mean deviation (MD), visual field index (VFI), and number of depressed points in pattern deviation map and total deviation map for every level of significance. RESULTS: The average test time was 56% shorter with SITA Faster (P < 0.001). The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for MD and VFI showed excellent agreement between both strategies, ICC = 0.98 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96, 0.99) and ICC = 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95, 0.99), respectively. For the number of depressed points in total deviation map and pattern deviation map, ICC demonstrated good agreement with values between 0.8 and 0.95. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that SITA Faster is a shorter test with strong agreement with SITA Standard parameters. These results suggest that SITA Faster could replace SITA Standard for glaucoma diagnosis.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: A high rate of unreliability is an issue in visual field (VF) testing, especially in elderly patients, and warrants patient education. We assessed whether subjective perception of the visual field test (VFT) is a good predictor of its reliability in different age groups and examined age differences in patients' awareness of VF damage. METHODS: This cross-sectional study investigated 107 VFT results of 54 patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Subjective perceptions were compared to reliability indices for cooperation analysis and to mean deviation results for VF damage analysis, and an age-segregated sub-analysis was performed. RESULTS: Kappa coefficients showed poor agreement between subjective and objective parameters. Nevertheless, there were age differences. Younger patients had a higher positive predictive value and sensitivity in cooperation analysis and a higher negative predictive value in VF damage analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' perception of cooperation in VFT is a poor predictor of its reliability. Although young cooperative patients may be aware of their good cooperation, even the youngest are unaware of their poor performance. This emphasizes the importance of giving proper directions to all patients during VFT to obtain better reliability indices. Younger, healthy patients are more aware of their health status, than those with a damaged VF, regardless of age. Therefore, illness education is crucial in all glaucoma patients.
