These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A Comparison of the Visual Field Parameters of SITA Faster and SITA Standard Strategies in Glaucoma.
    Author: Lavanya R, Riyazuddin M, Dasari S, Puttaiah NK, Venugopal JP, Pradhan ZS, Devi S, Sreenivasaiah S, Ganeshrao SB, Rao HL.
    Journal: J Glaucoma; 2020 Sep; 29(9):783-788. PubMed ID: 32459685.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To compare the visual field (VF) parameters of the new Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA), SITA Faster (SFR) with that of SITA Standard (SS) on the Humphrey Field Analyzer. METHODS: Ninety-seven eyes of 97 subjects (63 glaucoma, 26 glaucoma suspects, and 8 normal eyes) underwent VF examination with SFR and SS strategies on the same day in random order. Agreement in VF parameters between SFR and SS strategies was assessed by Bland and Altman plots. In addition, some subjects underwent a second VF examination with SFR strategy to evaluate its test-retest variability. RESULTS: The median test duration of SS strategy was 6 minutes 14 seconds, whereas SFR was 2 minutes 49 seconds (55% shorter, P<0.001). Median mean deviation (-7.3 vs. -7.6 dB, P=0.73) and VF index (88 vs. 88%, P=0.32) were similar between the 2 strategies, whereas pattern standard deviation was significantly higher (4.8 vs. 4.7 dB, P=0.01) with SS strategy. Overall average threshold sensitivity and Garway-Heath sector-wise threshold sensitivities were similar between the 2 strategies except for the nasal sector where SFR strategy had higher sensitivity (26 vs. 25 dB, P=0.02). Bland-Altman plots showed the mean difference in all VF parameters between the SS and SFR strategies were small (ranging from -1.0 dB for the nasal sector to -0.01 dB for superotemporal sector sensitivity). The test-retest variability of VF parameters with SFR strategy was low. CONCLUSIONS: VF parameters with SFR showed good agreement with that of SS strategy. This, combined with low test-retest variability, suggests that SFR can be considered for diagnosis and monitoring of glaucoma.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]