Suppr超能文献

在Humphrey视野检测中,瑞典交互式阈值算法与标准全阈值算法的敏感性比较

Sensitivity of Swedish interactive threshold algorithm compared with standard full threshold algorithm in Humphrey visual field testing.

作者信息

Sekhar G C, Naduvilath T J, Lakkai M, Jayakumar A J, Pandi G T, Mandal A K, Honavar S G

机构信息

L.V. Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.

出版信息

Ophthalmology. 2000 Jul;107(7):1303-8. doi: 10.1016/s0161-6420(00)00140-8.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the sensitivity of Swedish interactive threshold algorithm (SITA) strategies with the standard full threshold algorithm in the Humphrey Field Analyzer.

DESIGN

Observational case series.

PARTICIPANTS

Forty-eight glaucoma patients who were experienced in automated perimetry.

TESTING

Central field testing was performed with the 30-2 program using standard full threshold (SFT), SITA standard (SS), and SITA fast (SF) strategies. All three tests were carried out on each of four different days in a span of 4 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Sensitivity, repeatability, time saved, and the extent of defect in the SITA strategies were compared with those of the SFT.

RESULTS

The sensitivity of SS and SF were 95.12% and 92.68%, respectively. The time saved in SS and SF was 53.12+/-9.51% and 70.69+/-8.81%, respectively. The repeatability as assessed by intraclass correlation showed excellent repeatability for the SFT and SS strategies and excellent to poor repeatability with the SF strategy. With increasing mean deviation, the defects (significant at P<0.5%) in the pattern deviation plots tended to be more in the SITA strategies as compared with SFT.

CONCLUSIONS

Swedish interactive threshold algorithm strategies have good sensitivity and are significantly faster as compared with the standard threshold algorithm. The repeatability of the SFT and SS strategies are excellent, whereas that of the SF strategy is variable.

摘要

目的

比较瑞典交互式阈值算法(SITA)策略与 Humphrey 视野分析仪中的标准全阈值算法的敏感性。

设计

观察性病例系列。

参与者

48 名有自动视野检查经验的青光眼患者。

测试

使用标准全阈值(SFT)、SITA 标准(SS)和 SITA 快速(SF)策略,通过 30-2 程序进行中心视野测试。所有三项测试在 4 周内的四个不同日期分别对每位患者进行。

主要观察指标

将 SITA 策略的敏感性、可重复性、节省的时间以及缺陷程度与 SFT 的进行比较。

结果

SS 和 SF 的敏感性分别为 95.12%和 92.68%。SS 和 SF 节省的时间分别为 53.12±9.51%和 70.69±8.81%。通过组内相关性评估的可重复性显示,SFT 和 SS 策略具有出色的可重复性,而 SF 策略的可重复性则从出色到较差。随着平均偏差增加,与 SFT 相比,SITA 策略在模式偏差图中的缺陷(P<0.5%时有显著性)往往更多。

结论

瑞典交互式阈值算法策略具有良好的敏感性,并且与标准阈值算法相比显著更快。SFT 和 SS 策略的可重复性出色,而 SF 策略的可重复性则不稳定。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验