Hirasawa Kazunori, Shoji Nobuyuki, Okada Ayaka, Takano Kana, Tomioka Seiya
Department of Ophthalmology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kitasato University, Kanagawa, Japan.
Department of Ophthalmology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kitasato University, Kanagawa, Japan; Department of Orthoptics and Visual Science, School of Allied Health Sciences, Kitasato University, Kanagawa, Japan.
Vision Res. 2014 May;98:83-8. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2014.03.010. Epub 2014 Apr 3.
This prospective study aimed to evaluate the stimulus velocity for automated kinetic perimetry based on the test duration, the kinetic sensitivity, and the variability of the kinetic sensitivity in 31 eyes of 31 young healthy participants. Automated kinetic perimetry was performed using an Octopus 900 perimeter with Goldmann stimuli III4e, I4e, I3e, I2e, and I1e. The participants underwent testing at 14 predetermined meridians for each stimulus, with velocities of 2°, 3°, 4°, 5°, and 10°/s; each velocity was tested twice. The test duration, kinetic sensitivity, and variability of kinetic sensitivity were compared among the stimulus velocities. Twenty-nine eyes from 29 participants were analyzed, and two participants were excluded. The test durations at the velocities of 2°, 3°, 4°, 5°, and 10°/s were negatively correlated with the stimulus velocity (p<0.01). The variability of the kinetic sensitivities did not significantly differ among the stimulus velocities. The kinetic sensitivities at 2° and 3°/s did not differ significantly for all stimuli. However, those at 4°/s decreased for III4e, I4e, and I1e (p<0.05), and those at 5° and 10°/s decreased for all stimuli (p<0.05) compared with those at 2° or 3°/s. Although the test durations for each stimulus velocity were negatively correlated with the stimulus velocities, a stimulus velocity of 3° or 4°/s might be recommended for automated kinetic perimetry based on the changes in the kinetic sensitivity. As this study included only young participants, further studies in elderly participants may also be necessary.
这项前瞻性研究旨在基于测试持续时间、动态敏感度以及31名年轻健康参与者的31只眼中动态敏感度的变异性,评估自动动态视野检查的刺激速度。使用配备Goldmann刺激III4e、I4e、I3e、I2e和I1e的Octopus 900视野计进行自动动态视野检查。参与者在每个刺激的14个预定子午线上进行测试,速度分别为2°、3°、4°、5°和10°/秒;每个速度测试两次。比较不同刺激速度下的测试持续时间、动态敏感度和动态敏感度的变异性。分析了29名参与者的29只眼,排除了两名参与者。2°、3°、4°、5°和10°/秒速度下的测试持续时间与刺激速度呈负相关(p<0.01)。不同刺激速度下动态敏感度的变异性无显著差异。对于所有刺激,2°和3°/秒时的动态敏感度无显著差异。然而,与2°或3°/秒时相比,III4e、I4e和I1e在4°/秒时的动态敏感度降低(p<0.05),所有刺激在5°和10°/秒时的动态敏感度均降低(p<0.05)。尽管每个刺激速度下的测试持续时间与刺激速度呈负相关,但基于动态敏感度的变化,自动动态视野检查可能推荐3°或4°/秒的刺激速度。由于本研究仅纳入了年轻参与者,可能还需要对老年参与者进行进一步研究。