Kumar Harsh, Thulasidas Mithun
Glaucoma Services, Centre for Sight, B-5/24, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi 110029, India.
J Ophthalmol. 2020 Aug 22;2020:8384509. doi: 10.1155/2020/8384509. eCollection 2020.
To compare visual field results obtained using Melbourne Rapid Fields (MRF) iPad-based perimeter software and Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) 24-2 Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) standard program in glaucoma patients.
A cross-sectional observational study.
In this single-centre study involving patients diagnosed with glaucoma, the perimetric outcomes of MRF were compared against those returned from the HFA 24-2 SITA standard. Outcomes included mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD), visual field index (VFI)/visual capacity (VC), foveal threshold, test time, number of points depressed at < 5% on PSD probability plot, and glaucoma hemifield test/color coded indicator.
The study included 28 eyes of 28 glaucoma patients. Mean (standard deviation) test times were 342.07 (56.70) seconds for MRF and 375.11 (88.95) for HFA 24-2 SITA standard (=0.046). Mean MD was significantly lower for MRF (Δ = 3.09, < 0.001), and mean PSD was significantly higher for MRF (Δ = 1.40, =0.005) compared with HFA. The mean foveal threshold for the MRF was significantly lower than the mean HFA foveal threshold ((Δ = 9.25, < 0.001). The number of points depressed at < 5% on the PSD probability plot was significantly less for MRF ( < 0.001). Other perimetric outcomes showed no significant differences between both. Bland-Altman plots showed that considerable variability existed between the programs.
MRF is a good cost-effective, time-saving, user-friendly tool for monitoring visual fields in settings where access to traditional perimetry is limited. The lack of Internet strength in rural areas and questionable detection of early cases may be two points in MRF fields requiring an upgrade.
比较青光眼患者使用基于iPad的墨尔本快速视野（MRF）周边视野计软件和Humphrey视野分析仪（HFA）24-2瑞典交互式阈值算法（SITA）标准程序所获得的视野结果。
一项横断面观察性研究。
在这项涉及被诊断为青光眼患者的单中心研究中，将MRF的视野检查结果与HFA 24-2 SITA标准程序返回的结果进行比较。结果包括平均偏差（MD）、模式标准偏差（PSD）、视野指数（VFI）/视觉能力（VC）、中央凹阈值、检查时间、PSD概率图上低于5%的压低点数，以及青光眼半视野检查/颜色编码指标。
该研究纳入了28例青光眼患者的28只眼。MRF的平均（标准差）检查时间为342.07（56.70）秒，HFA 24-2 SITA标准程序的为375.11（88.95）秒（P = 0.046）。与HFA相比，MRF的平均MD显著更低（Δ = 3.09，P < 0.001），而MRF的平均PSD显著更高（Δ = 1.40，P = 0.005）。MRF的平均中央凹阈值显著低于HFA的平均中央凹阈值（Δ = 9.25，P < 0.001）。MRF在PSD概率图上低于5%的压低点数显著更少（P < 0.001）。其他视野检查结果在两者之间无显著差异。Bland-Altman图显示程序之间存在相当大的变异性。
在传统视野检查受限的环境中，MRF是一种具有良好成本效益、节省时间且用户友好的视野监测工具。农村地区网络信号不强以及早期病例检测存疑可能是MRF视野检查需要改进的两点。
