Hicks B C, Anderson D R
Am J Ophthalmol. 1983 May;95(5):692-700. doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(83)90390-2.
To evaluate the ability of the Friedmann visual field analyzer to determine visual threshold and the depth of visual field defects, we correlated the visual threshold determined kinetically (Goldmann perimeter) with the static threshold (Friedmann analyzer) in various parts of the central field. We found the following: the Friedmann working threshold correlated linearly with the height of the hill of vision represented by the position of the kinetic isopters of the Goldmann perimeter; the static visual threshold (Friedmann) at a particular location, whether normal or abnormal, was linearly related to the kinetic visual threshold (Goldmann) at that location; and the depth of all visual field defects was essentially the same with both instruments. Thus, the Friedmann analyzer accurately quantitated the central visual field in both the normal and abnormal regions, and may be advantageous for following the progress of early glaucomatous defects. For other patients, however, its usefulness may be limited, because defects outside 25 degrees cannot be documented, the visual field examination may be lengthy and inefficient when quantitating large defects of irregular depth, and the maximal quantitation of depth with the Friedmann analyzer is 2.0 log units less than with the Goldmann perimeter near fixation (but there is progressively less difference for defects further from fixation).
为评估弗里德曼视野分析仪测定视觉阈值和视野缺损深度的能力，我们将通过动态测定（戈德曼视野计）的视觉阈值与中央视野各部位的静态阈值（弗里德曼分析仪）进行了相关性分析。我们发现如下结果：弗里德曼工作阈值与由戈德曼视野计的动态等值线位置所代表的视力曲线高度呈线性相关；特定位置的静态视觉阈值（弗里德曼），无论正常或异常，均与该位置的动态视觉阈值（戈德曼）呈线性相关；并且两种仪器所测得的所有视野缺损深度基本相同。因此，弗里德曼分析仪能够准确地对正常和异常区域的中央视野进行定量分析，对于跟踪早期青光眼性缺损的进展可能具有优势。然而，对于其他患者，其用途可能有限，因为无法记录25度以外的缺损，在对深度不规则的大缺损进行定量时视野检查可能耗时且效率低下，并且弗里德曼分析仪对深度的最大定量比在注视点附近的戈德曼视野计少2.0对数单位（但对于离注视点较远的缺损，差异逐渐减小）。
