Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Hutchings, Natalie; Hosking, Sarah L.; Wild, John Millington; Flanagan, John (2001)
Publisher: Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: RE

Classified by OpenAIRE into

mesheuropmc: eye diseases, genetic structures, sense organs
PURPOSE. To determine the magnitude of the homogenous, LF(Ho), and the heterogeneous, LF(He), components of the long-term fluctuation (LF) in glaucoma suspects and in stable primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) patients undergoing short-wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP) and to compare the magnitude of the SWAP LF components with those elicited by standard white-on-white (W-W) perimetry. \ud \ud METHODS. The sample comprised 33 glaucoma suspects and 17 patients with early-to-moderate stable POAG who underwent W-W perimetry and SWAP at each of six visits over a mean period of 12.75 months (SD, 2.29). The LF(Ho), LF(He), and error components of the long-term fluctuation were determined between the third and seventh visual field examinations. The intervening visual field examinations and the optic nerve head parameters, derived both by stereo observation and by the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph, were used to confirm stability over the follow-up period. \ud \ud RESULTS. The LF(Ho) and LF(He) components were larger in the POAG patients than in the glaucoma suspects for both W-W perimetry and SWAP; the magnitude was independent of the depth of defect and of the short-term fluctuation. All three components of long-term fluctuation were greater for SWAP than for W-W perimetry, both in the glaucoma suspects and in the POAG patients. \ud \ud CONCLUSIONS. SWAP exhibits greater long-term fluctuation than white-on-white perimetry. The usefulness of SWAP will be limited if the extent of this variability is not overcome in future statistical procedures developed to detect progressive visual field loss.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. Sample PA, Haegerstrom-Portnoy G, Adams AJ. Optimum parameters for short-wavelength automated perimetry. J Glaucoma. 1996; 5:375-383.
    • 2. Heron G, Adams AJ, Husted R. Central visual-fields for short wavelength sensitive pathways in glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1988;29:64 -72.
    • 3. de Jong LAMS, Snepvangers CEJ, van den Berg TJ, Langerhorst CT. Blue-yellow perimetry in the detection of early glaucomatous damage. Doc Ophthalmol. 1990;75:303-314.
    • 4. Sample PA, Taylor JDN, Martinez GA, Lusky M, Weinreb RN. Short-wavelength color visual-fields in glaucoma suspects at risk. Am J Ophthalmol. 1993;115:225-233.
    • 5. Sample PA, Weinreb RN. Color perimetry for assessment of primary open-angle glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1990;31: 1869 -1875.
    • 6. Johnson CA, Adams AJ, Casson EJ, Brandt JD. Blue-on-yellow perimetry can predict the development of glaucomatous visual field loss. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993;111:645- 650.
    • 7. Johnson CA, Brandt JD, Khong AM, Adams AJ. Short-wavelength automated perimetry in low-, medium-, and high-risk ocular hypertensive eyes. Initial baseline results. Arch Ophthalmol. 1995;113: 70 -76.
    • 8. Kwon YH, Park HJ, Jap A, Ugurlu S, Caprioli J. Test-retest variability of blue-on-yellow perimetry is greater than white-on-white perimetry in normal subjects. Am J Ophthalmol. 1998;126:29 -36.
    • 9. Wild JM, Moss ID, Whitaker D, O'Neill EC. The statistical interpretation of blue-on-yellow visual field loss. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1995;36:1398 -1410.
    • 10. Sample PA, Cook JN, Weinreb RN. Variability and sensitivity of short-wavelength color visual fields in normal and glaucoma eyes. In: Ophthalmic & Visual Optics/Noninvasive Assessment of the Visual System Technical Digest, 1993. Washington, DC: Optical Society of America; 1993:292-295.
    • 11. Wild JM, Cubbidge RP, Pacey IE, Robinson R. Statistical aspects of the normal visual field in short-wavelength automated perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1998;39:54 - 64.
    • 12. BebieĀ“ H, Fankhauser F, Spahr J. Static perimetry: accuracy and fluctuations. Acta Ophthalmol. 1976;54:339 -348.
    • 13. Hutchings N, Wild JM, Hussey MK, Flanagan JG, Trope GE. The long-term fluctuation of the visual field in stable glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:3429 -3436.
    • 14. Blumenthal EZ, Sample PA, Zangwill L, Lee AC, Kono Y, Weinreb RN. Comparison of long-term variability for standard and shortwavelength automated perimetry in stable glaucoma patients. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;129:309 -313.
    • 15. Airaksinen PJ, Tuulonen A, Werner EB. Clinical evaluation of the optic disc and retinal nerve fibre layer. In: Ritch R, Shields MB, Krupin T, eds. The Glaucomas-Basic Sciences. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book; 1996:617- 658.
    • 16. Chauhan BC, Drance SM, Douglas GR. The use of visual field indices in detecting changes in the visual field in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1990;31:512-520.
    • 17. Hodapp E, Parrish RK, Anderson DR. Clinical Decisions in Glaucoma. St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book; 1993.
    • 18. Flammer J, Drance SM, Schulzer M. The estimation and testing of the components of long-term fluctuation of the differential light threshold. In: Greve EL, Heijl A, eds. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1983;35:383-389.
    • 19. Paradine CM, Rivett BHP. In: Statistical methods for technologists. Two-Factor Analysis of Variance with Replications. London: English Universities Press; 1966:246 -248.
    • 20. Flammer J, Drance SM, Fankhauser F, Augustiny L. Differential light threshold in automated static perimetry-factors influencing short-term fluctuation. Arch Ophthalmol. 1984;102:876 - 879.
    • 21. Flanagan JG, Moss ID, Wild JM, et al. Evaluation of FASTPAC: a new strategy for threshold estimation with the Humphrey Field Analyzer. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1993;231:465- 469.
    • 22. Heijl A, Lindgren A, Lindgren G. Test-retest variability in glaucomatous visual fields. Am J Ophthalmol. 1989;108:130 -135.
    • 23. Gelfand AE, Hills SE, Racine-Poon A, Smith AFM. Illustration of Bayesian inference in normal data models using Gibbs sampling. J Am Stat Assoc. 1990;85:972-985.
    • 24. Gelfand AE, Smith AFM. Sampling based approaches to calculating marginal densities. J Am Stat Assoc. 1990;85:398 - 409.
    • 25. Moss ID, Wild JM, Whitaker DJ. The influence of age-related cataract on blue-on-yellow perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1995;36:764 -773.
    • 26. Moss ID, Wild JM. The influence of induced forward light scatter on the normal blue-on-yellow perimetric profile. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1994;232:409 - 414.
    • 27. Sample PA, Esterson FD, Weinreb RN. A practical method for obtaining an index of lens density with an automated perimeter. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1989;30:786 -787.
    • 28. Sample PA, Quirante JS, Weinreb RN. Age-related changes in the human lens. Clinical assessment of age-related changes in the human lens. Acta Ophthalmol. 1991;69:310 -314.
    • 29. Werner EB, Petrig B, Krupin T, Bishop KI. Variability of automated visual fields in clinically stable glaucoma patients. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1989;30:1083-1089.
    • 30. Katz J, Sommer A. A longitudinal study of the age-adjusted variability of automated visual fields. Arch Ophthalmol. 1987;105: 1083-1086.
    • 31. Flammer J, Drance SM, Schulzer M. Covariates of the long-term fluctuation of the differential light threshold. Arch Ophthalmol. 1984;102:880 - 882.
    • 32. Briggs JL, Hudson C, Silvestri G, Jackson AJ. The impact of stimulus condition on frequency-of-seeing in automated static perimetry [ARVO Abstract]. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41(4):S284. Abstract nr 1496.
    • 33. Wild JM, Moss ID. Baseline alterations in blue-on-yellow normal perimetric sensitivity. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1996; 234:141-149.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article