Results 121 to 130 of about 5,765 (165)
False Positive Responses in Standard Automated Perimetry [PDF]
American Journal of Ophthalmology, 2022 To analyze the relationship between rates of false positive (FP) responses and standard automated perimetry results.Prospective multicenter cross-sectional study.One hundred twenty-six patients with manifest or suspect glaucoma were tested with Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA) Standard, SITA Fast, and SITA Faster at each of 2 visits ...
+2 more
exaly +5 more sources
Some of the next articles are maybe not open access.
Related searches:
Related searches:
Current Practice with Standard Automated Perimetry
Seminars in Ophthalmology, 2000This article reviews standard visual field testing. The authors discuss the psychophysics involved in the design of the perimeter and the parameters used to test visual field sensitivity. The authors also explain normal and pathological sensitivity across the visual field, the patient and testing conditions that influence visual field results, and the ...
C F, Bosworth +3 more
openaire +2 more sources
Frequency Doubling Technology perimetry and standard automated perimetry in migraine
Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 2005Abstract The literature suggests that visual field defects may be more common in people who experience migraine. The Humphrey frequency doubling (FDT) visual field instrument selectively examines the magnocellular visual pathway, but has not previously been used to investigate visual function in migraine.
Deacon E, Harle, Bruce J W, Evans
openaire +2 more sources
Rarebit Perimetry for Bedside Testing: Comparison With Standard Automated Perimetry
Journal of Neuro-Ophthalmology, 2010Rarebit perimetry (RBP), a technique developed for the detection of early damage to the afferent visual system, has not been extensively tested at the bedside. This study was designed to test the feasibility of bedside testing with RBP in comparison with standard automated perimetry (SAP) performed in the clinic.We tested 29 eyes of 15 subjects ...
Samuel K, Steven Houston +3 more
openaire +2 more sources
Current Eye Research, 2017
This prospective observational study compared the performance of size modulation standard automated perimetry with the Octopus 600 10-2 test program, with stimulus size modulation during testing, based on stimulus intensity and conventional standard automated perimetry, with that of the Humphrey 10-2 test program in glaucoma patients.Eighty-seven eyes ...
Kazunori Hirasawa +2 more
exaly +3 more sources
This prospective observational study compared the performance of size modulation standard automated perimetry with the Octopus 600 10-2 test program, with stimulus size modulation during testing, based on stimulus intensity and conventional standard automated perimetry, with that of the Humphrey 10-2 test program in glaucoma patients.Eighty-seven eyes ...
Kazunori Hirasawa +2 more
exaly +3 more sources
Relationship between HEP perimetry and standard automated perimetry
Acta Ophthalmologica, 2010Abstract Purpose To evaluate the relationship between Standard Automated Perimetry (SAP) performed with Humphrey perimeter (Carl Zeiss Meditec, EEUU) and a new white‐white perimetry tested with Heidelberg Edge Perimeter (HEP, Heidelberg Engineering, Alemania).
L GIL ARRIBAS +7 more
openaire +1 more source
Comparison of High-pass Resolution Perimetry and Standard Automated Perimetry in Glaucoma
American Journal of Ophthalmology, 1995We sought to ascertain whether high-pass resolution perimetry would provide results comparable to those of standard perimetry.Thirty-four eyes with primary open-angle glaucoma, 37 eyes suspected of having glaucoma, and 36 normal control eyes were matched for age and lens density. We controlled for refraction, pupil size, and learning effects.
G A, Martinez, P A, Sample, R N, Weinreb
openaire +2 more sources
Reading a standard automated perimetry printout
Acta Ophthalmologica, 2022AbstractInterpreting the results of standard automated perimetry (SAP) is not difficult but a systematic approach is pivotal. In this part of the course we address the following topics: Which test to choose in which situation? Is the test reliable? What are common artefacts and how do you recognize them?
openaire +1 more source
Frequency-Doubling Perimetry: Comparison With Standard Automated Perimetry to Detect Glaucoma
American Journal of Ophthalmology, 2007To compare second generation frequency-doubling perimetry (FDP) with standard automated perimetry (SAP) to detect glaucomatous visual field abnormalities.Prospective, cross-sectional, controlled observational study.Fifty eyes of 50 patients with glaucoma with confirmed SAP visual field abnormalities and 42 eyes from 42 normal control subjects were ...
Narakorn, Leeprechanon +4 more
openaire +2 more sources
2016
This chapter aims to describe and update several aspects on visual field testing in glaucoma, including its fundaments, methodology, and illustrations. First, basic aspects on the visual field and standard automated perimetry are considered. Next, the importance of quality of results for both single field analysis and visual field series is emphasized ...
Francisco Javier Goñi, Krapez Maja
openaire +1 more source
This chapter aims to describe and update several aspects on visual field testing in glaucoma, including its fundaments, methodology, and illustrations. First, basic aspects on the visual field and standard automated perimetry are considered. Next, the importance of quality of results for both single field analysis and visual field series is emphasized ...
Francisco Javier Goñi, Krapez Maja
openaire +1 more source