| Purpose: to evaluate and compare the validity of reliability indices (False positive, false negative, and fixation loss) used in SITA and Full threshold perimetry.
Methods: two samples of 74 glaucoma patients with early to moderately advanced visual field loss were selected from outpatient clinic of Manchester Royal eye hospital. All there patients had prior experience on the certain perimetry. Test-retest variability compensated by variability-threshold relationship was measured in the two samples to play as a gold standard of reliability in this experiment. Stepwise multiple regression analysis was used to analyze the correlation between reliability indices (FP, FN and Fixation loss) and test-retest variability.
Result: a poor relationship was found between reliability indices and test-retest variability in both full threshold and SITA group (R2 is 0.0516 and 0.169 in full threshold and SITA respectively). As the most significant index, False negative contributed 3% and 15% of variability in each group.
Conclusion: the reliability indices now used in threshold perimetry are not good enough to predict the variability of patient.
|
