Meethal Najiya Sundus Kadavath, Pel Johan J M, Mazumdar Deepmala, Asokan Rashima, Panday Manish, van der Steen Johannes, George Ronnie
Department of Neuroscience, Vestibular and Ocular Motor Research Group, Erasmus MC, 2040, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Medical and Vision Research Foundation, Chennai, India.
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2019 Jun;257(6):1277-1287. doi: 10.1007/s00417-019-04311-4. Epub 2019 Apr 3.
To evaluate the screening accuracy of an Eye Movement Perimetry (EMP) in comparison with Frequency Doubling Perimetry (FDP) and to investigate the patient preference and perception towards these visual field screening methods.
A total of 104 healthy subjects (mean age (SD) of 48 (14) years) and 73 glaucoma patients (mean age (SD) of 52 (13) years) were recruited. All the participants underwent a comprehensive ophthalmic evaluation including the 24-2 SITA standard protocol on the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA). This was followed by the 26-point protocol in EMP and the C-20-1 protocol in FDP. During EMP, all subjects were instructed to fixate a central target and to look at the detected peripheral target, followed by refixation of the central target and Saccadic Reaction Time (SRT) towards each of the "seen" stimuli was calculated. Next, a questionnaire was administered to evaluate the patient preference and perception towards the perimetry techniques. Mean SRTs and Robin scores were used to plot Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curves to determine the screening accuracies. From the questionnaire survey, the frequency distributions of the responses were calculated.
Robin score and SRT were significantly increased in glaucoma patients in comparison with the age-matched healthy subjects (p < 0.001). The ROC analysis revealed comparable Area Under the Curve (AUC) values (0.95, p = 0.81) with a specificity of 95.2% for FDP and 96.2% for EMP with a sensitivity of 87.7%. Thirty-seven percent of the older age group (≥ 40 years) and 65% of severe glaucoma patients showed preference for EMP over FDP.
This study results indicate that the customized protocol in EMP provides efficient and rapid means of screening visual field defects in glaucoma, which compared well with FDP. Elderly healthy participants and patients with moderate and severe glaucomatous defects preferred EMP as it permitted natural reflexive eye movements thereby resembling a real-life test setting.
评估眼动视野计(EMP)与频率加倍视野计(FDP)相比的筛查准确性,并调查患者对这些视野筛查方法的偏好和认知。
共招募了104名健康受试者(平均年龄(标准差)为48(14)岁)和73名青光眼患者(平均年龄(标准差)为52(13)岁)。所有参与者均接受了全面的眼科评估,包括在Humphrey视野分析仪(HFA)上进行24-2 SITA标准方案检查。随后进行EMP的26点方案和FDP的C-20-1方案检查。在EMP检查期间,所有受试者被指示注视中央目标并看向检测到的周边目标,然后重新注视中央目标,并计算对每个“看到”的刺激的扫视反应时间(SRT)。接下来,发放一份问卷以评估患者对视野计技术的偏好和认知。使用平均SRT和罗宾分数绘制受试者操作特征(ROC)曲线以确定筛查准确性。从问卷调查中,计算出反应的频率分布。
与年龄匹配的健康受试者相比,青光眼患者的罗宾分数和SRT显著增加(p < 0.001)。ROC分析显示曲线下面积(AUC)值相当(0.95,p = 0.81),FDP的特异性为95.2%,EMP的特异性为96.2%,敏感性为87.7%。37%的老年组(≥40岁)和65%的重度青光眼患者表示更喜欢EMP而非FDP。
本研究结果表明,EMP中的定制方案为青光眼视野缺损筛查提供了高效、快速的方法,与FDP相比效果良好。老年健康参与者以及中度和重度青光眼缺损患者更喜欢EMP,因为它允许自然的反射性眼球运动,从而类似于现实生活中的测试环境。