SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türk Oftalmoloji Dergisi / 2003 / Cilt: 33 - Sayı: 1-1

Comparison of the Humphrey swedish intractive thresholding algorithm (SITA) and full threshold strategies in patients with glaucoma

Glokomlu olgulara uygulanan "Humphrey swedish interactive thresholding algorithm" (SITA) eşik testi ile santral 30-2 standart eşik testinin karşılaştırılması

Sumru ÖNAL
Gülçin TÜRKER
Hasan Hüseyin ALTINBAŞ
Belgin İZGİ
Pages
122–126
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Quantitative comparison showed a high correlation between indices (MD SFT vs.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: To compare the Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm (SITA) strategy with the full threshold strategy in patients with glaucoma.Methods: Using the Humphrey visual field analyzer model HFA II (Allergari Humphrey San Leandro, CA), 76 eyes of 39 patients with suspect or manifest glaucoma or ocular hyper-tension were tested.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Central field testing was performed with the 30-2 program using standard full threshold (SFT) and SITA standard (SS) strategies each performed on the same day.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Quantitative comparison showed a high correlation between indices (MD SFT vs.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm (SITA) strategy with the full threshold strategy in patients with glaucoma.Methods: Using the Humphrey visual field analyzer model HFA II (Allergari Humphrey San Leandro, CA), 76 eyes of 39 patients with suspect or manifest glaucoma or ocular hyper-tension were tested. All patients were experienced with the automated perimeter. Central field testing was performed with the 30-2 program using standard full threshold (SFT) and SITA standard (SS) strategies each performed on the same day. Results: Mean testing dropped from 15'34" with SFT to 7'62" with SS. The SS strategy re-quired on average 50.3% less time than SFT strategy. There was no statistically significant dif-ference between the indices MD and PSD (p>0.05). Quantitative comparison showed a high correlation between indices (MD SFT vs. MD SS: r=0.83, p

Özet

Amaç: Glokomlu olgulara uygulanan "Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm" (SITA) eşik testi ile santral 30-2 standart eşik testinin (standart full threshold test=SET) karşılaştırılma-sı. Gereç ve Yöntem: Humphrey görme alanı analizatörü model HFA II (Allergan Humphrey San Leandro, CA) kullanılarak şüpheli glokomu veya glokomu veya oküler hipertansiyonu olan 39 olgunun 76 gözü test edildi. Tüm olguların otomatik perimetri deneyimi vardı. Santral görme alanı 30-2 standart eşik testi (SET) ve SITA standart (SS) eşik testi kullanılarak aynı gün test edildi. Bulgular: Ortalama test süresi SET eşik testi ile 15'34" iken SS eşik testi ile 7'62"ye düştü. SS eşik testi SET eşik testine göre ortalama olarak %50.3 daha az zaman gerektiriyordu. Global indisler arasındaki fark istatistiksel olarak anlamlı değildi. Ortalama sapma (mean deviati-on=MD) ve patern standart sapma (pattern standart deviation=PSD) açısından iki test arasında anlamlı fark görülmedi (p>0.05). Global indislerin kantitatif karşılaştırılması ise yüksek korelasyon gösteriyordu (MD SET vs. MD SS: r=0.83, p

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖNAL, S., TÜRKER, G., ALTINBAŞ, H. H., İZGİ, B. (2022). Comparison of the Humphrey swedish intractive thresholding algorithm (SITA) and full threshold strategies in patients with glaucoma. Türk Oftalmoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 33 - Sayı: 1-1, 122–126. https://ajindex.com/articles/638993

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Gürler B, Tamçelik N, Satıcı A, Oğuz H, Güzey M, Oca- koğlu Ö: Glokomlu olgulara uygulanan santral 30-2 stan- dart eşik testi ile santral 30-2 Fastpac eşik testinin retinal eşik değerleri ortalamaları ve global indislerinin karşılaş- tırılması. TOG. 1998;28:206-212
  2. Leydhecker W: Perimetry update. Ann Ophthalmol 1983;15: 511-5
  3. Bengtsson B, Heijl A: Evaluation of a new perimetric threshold strategy, SITA, in patients with manifest and suspect glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1998;76:268- 72
  4. Bengtsson B, Heijl A, Olsson J: Evaluation of a new threshold visual field strategy, SITA, in normal subjects. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1998;76:165-9
  5. Bengtsson B, Olsson J, Heijl A, Rootzen H: A new gene- ration of algorithms for computarized threshold peri- metry, SITA. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1997;75:368-75
  6. Wild JM, Pacey IE, Hancock SA, Cunliffe IA: Between- algorithm, between-individual differences in normal peri- metric sensitivity: Full Threshold, FASTPAC, and SITA. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1999;40:1152-61
  7. Olsson J, Bentsson B, Heijl A, Rootzen H: An improved method to estimate frequency of false positive answers in computarized perimetry. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1997;75:181-3
  8. Flanagan JG, Wild JM, Trope GE: Evaluation of FAST- PAC, a new strategy for threshold estimation with the Humphrey Field Analyzer, in a glaucomatous population. Ophthalmology 1993; 100:949-54
  9. Mills RP, Barnebey HS, Migliazzo CV, Li Y: Does saving time using FASTPAC or suprathreshold testing reduce quality of visual field? Ophthalmology 1994;101:1569-603
  10. Nordmann JP, Brion F, Hamard P, Mouton-Chipin D: Evaluation of the Humphrey perimetry programs SITA Standard and SITA Fast in normal probands and patients with glaucoma. J Fr Ophthalmol 1998;21:549-54
  11. Shirato S, Inoune R, Fukushima K, Suzuki Y: Clinical evaluation of SITA: a new family of perimetric testing strategies. Greafes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1999;237: 29-34
  12. Wild JM, Pacey IE, O'Neill EC, Cunliffe IA: The SITA perimetric threshold algorithms in glaucoma. Invest Oph- thalmol Vis Sci 1999;40:1998-2009
  13. Sekhar GC, Naduvilath TJ, Lakkai M, et al: Sensitivity of Swedish interactive threshold algorithm compared with standard full threshold algorithm in Humphrey visual fi- eld testing. Ophthalmology 2000; 107:1303-8
  14. Heijl A, Bengtsson B, Patella VM: Glaucoma follow-up when converting from long to short perimetric threshold tests. Arch Ophthalmol 2000; 118:489-93
  15. Sharma AK, Goldberg I, G