Werner E B, Krupin T, Adelson A, Feitl M E
Department of Ophthalmology, Hahnemann University, Philadelphia, PA 19102.
Ophthalmology. 1990 Jan;97(1):44-8. doi: 10.1016/s0161-6420(90)32628-3.
The first four Octopus-automated visual field examinations of 29 patients with elevated intraocular pressure but apparently normal optic discs and Goldmann visual fields were studied for the presence of a learning effect on the visual field parameters of mean sensitivity, number of disturbed test locations, total field loss, and short-term fluctuation. A learning effect, if present, would manifest itself as an improvement in the visual field as patients become more experienced with the test. There was no apparent effect of patient experience on the mean sensitivity of the whole visual fields or the mean sensitivity of the test locations within 20 degrees of fixation. There was a significant (P = 0.012) increase in mean sensitivity for the test locations outside 20 degrees of fixation. There were significant (P less than 0.01) improvements in short-term fluctuation, total loss, and number of disturbed points between the first and second visual field examinations. The results indicated that there was a learning effect between the first and second automated visual field in glaucoma suspect patients who had previous experience with manual perimetry. It was not, however, very large in most patients and seems to be present in the peripheral portions of the visual field only. In most cases, it was not necessary to obtain more than two "baseline" examinations unless a patient demonstrated unusually high short-term fluctuation or had visual field defects inconsistent with the remainder of their clinical examination.
对29例眼压升高但视盘明显正常且Goldmann视野正常的患者进行了前四次章鱼自动视野检查，以研究对平均敏感度、受干扰测试位置数量、总视野缺损和短期波动等视野参数是否存在学习效应。如果存在学习效应，随着患者对测试更加熟悉，视野会有所改善。患者的经验对整个视野的平均敏感度或注视点20度范围内测试位置的平均敏感度没有明显影响。在注视点20度范围以外的测试位置，平均敏感度有显著（P = 0.012）提高。第一次和第二次视野检查之间，短期波动、总缺损和受干扰点数有显著（P小于0.01）改善。结果表明，在有手动视野检查经验的青光眼疑似患者中，第一次和第二次自动视野检查之间存在学习效应。然而，在大多数患者中这种效应不是很大，似乎仅存在于视野的周边部分。在大多数情况下，除非患者表现出异常高的短期波动或有与其余临床检查结果不符的视野缺损，否则没有必要进行超过两次的“基线”检查。
