青光眼患者虚拟现实视距测量与Humphrey视场分析仪快速策略的比较。

Q2 Medicine
Fernanda Nicolela Susanna, Carolina Nicolela Susanna, Pedro Gabriel Salomão Libânio, Fernanda Tiemi Nishikawa, Renato Antunes Schiave Germano, Remo Susanna Junior
{"title":"青光眼患者虚拟现实视距测量与Humphrey视场分析仪快速策略的比较。","authors":"Fernanda Nicolela Susanna, Carolina Nicolela Susanna, Pedro Gabriel Salomão Libânio, Fernanda Tiemi Nishikawa, Renato Antunes Schiave Germano, Remo Susanna Junior","doi":"10.1016/j.ogla.2024.12.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study compared the agreement between the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) SITA Fast strategy and a novel virtual reality head-mounted visual perimetry device (VisuALL) in patients with glaucoma.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This is prospective observational study.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>This study was conducted on 62 eyes of 39 glaucoma subjects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All participants had visual field (VF) testing with the VisuALL AVAFAST strategy and the HFA (24-2, Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm FAST). The mean sensitivity of the whole VF and each quadrant was compared between both machines. Additionally, the pattern deviation plot was analyzed to compare the agreement of both devices to detect localized VF defects.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Correlation and agreement between the mean sensitivity of the fast strategies from VisuALL and HFA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The global mean sensitivity of the VisuALL and the HFA correlated significantly (r = 0.60; P < 0.001) and was in agreement (r = 0.73; P < 0.001). The detection of VF defects in all quadrants was also moderately correlated and in agreement. Participants overwhelmingly preferred the VisuALL over the conventional (80%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although the mean sensitivity and ability to detect localized VF defects of the VisuALL were correlated and in agreement with the HFA, this was only moderate. This indicates that the VisuALL AVAFast strategy must be used with caution.</p><p><strong>Financial disclosure(s): </strong>The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.</p>","PeriodicalId":56368,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology. Glaucoma","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison between the Fast Strategies of a Virtual Reality Perimetry and the Humphrey Field Analyzer in Patients with Glaucoma.\",\"authors\":\"Fernanda Nicolela Susanna, Carolina Nicolela Susanna, Pedro Gabriel Salomão Libânio, Fernanda Tiemi Nishikawa, Renato Antunes Schiave Germano, Remo Susanna Junior\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ogla.2024.12.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study compared the agreement between the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) SITA Fast strategy and a novel virtual reality head-mounted visual perimetry device (VisuALL) in patients with glaucoma.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This is prospective observational study.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>This study was conducted on 62 eyes of 39 glaucoma subjects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All participants had visual field (VF) testing with the VisuALL AVAFAST strategy and the HFA (24-2, Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm FAST). The mean sensitivity of the whole VF and each quadrant was compared between both machines. Additionally, the pattern deviation plot was analyzed to compare the agreement of both devices to detect localized VF defects.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Correlation and agreement between the mean sensitivity of the fast strategies from VisuALL and HFA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The global mean sensitivity of the VisuALL and the HFA correlated significantly (r = 0.60; P < 0.001) and was in agreement (r = 0.73; P < 0.001). The detection of VF defects in all quadrants was also moderately correlated and in agreement. Participants overwhelmingly preferred the VisuALL over the conventional (80%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although the mean sensitivity and ability to detect localized VF defects of the VisuALL were correlated and in agreement with the HFA, this was only moderate. This indicates that the VisuALL AVAFast strategy must be used with caution.</p><p><strong>Financial disclosure(s): </strong>The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56368,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmology. Glaucoma\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmology. Glaucoma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ogla.2024.12.004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology. Glaucoma","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ogla.2024.12.004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究比较了Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) SITA Fast策略和一种新型虚拟现实头戴式视距离仪(VisuALL)在青光眼患者中的一致性。设计:本研究为前瞻性观察性研究。参与者:本研究对39例青光眼患者的62只眼进行了研究。方法:所有受试者采用VisuALL AVAFAST策略和HFA (24-2, Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm FAST)进行视野测试。比较两种机器的全视野和各象限平均灵敏度。此外,分析了模式偏差(PD)图,以比较两种设备检测局部VF缺陷的一致性。主要结果:VisuALL和HFA快速策略的平均敏感性之间的相关性和一致性。结果:VisuALL与HFA的整体平均灵敏度有显著相关性(r= 0.60, P < 0.001),两者一致(r= 0.73, P < 0.001)。在所有象限的视野缺陷的检测也适度相关和一致。参与者绝大多数更喜欢VisuALL而不是传统的SAP(80%)。结论:虽然VisuALL的平均灵敏度和检测局部视野缺陷的能力与HFA相关,但这只是适度的。这表明VisuALL AVAFast策略必须谨慎使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison between the Fast Strategies of a Virtual Reality Perimetry and the Humphrey Field Analyzer in Patients with Glaucoma.

Purpose: This study compared the agreement between the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) SITA Fast strategy and a novel virtual reality head-mounted visual perimetry device (VisuALL) in patients with glaucoma.

Design: This is prospective observational study.

Participants: This study was conducted on 62 eyes of 39 glaucoma subjects.

Methods: All participants had visual field (VF) testing with the VisuALL AVAFAST strategy and the HFA (24-2, Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm FAST). The mean sensitivity of the whole VF and each quadrant was compared between both machines. Additionally, the pattern deviation plot was analyzed to compare the agreement of both devices to detect localized VF defects.

Main outcome measures: Correlation and agreement between the mean sensitivity of the fast strategies from VisuALL and HFA.

Results: The global mean sensitivity of the VisuALL and the HFA correlated significantly (r = 0.60; P < 0.001) and was in agreement (r = 0.73; P < 0.001). The detection of VF defects in all quadrants was also moderately correlated and in agreement. Participants overwhelmingly preferred the VisuALL over the conventional (80%).

Conclusions: Although the mean sensitivity and ability to detect localized VF defects of the VisuALL were correlated and in agreement with the HFA, this was only moderate. This indicates that the VisuALL AVAFast strategy must be used with caution.

Financial disclosure(s): The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ophthalmology. Glaucoma
Ophthalmology. Glaucoma Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
140
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信