Premium
A screening test for visual disorders based on Rarebit perimetry
Author(s) -
MARTIN LM,
WANGER P
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
acta ophthalmologica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.534
H-Index - 87
eISSN - 1755-3768
pISSN - 1755-375X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1755-3768.2008.445.x
Subject(s) - visual field , visual field test , test (biology) , visual acuity , ophthalmology , optic neuritis , medicine , optometry , audiology , glaucoma , psychology , paleontology , psychiatry , multiple sclerosis , biology
Purpose To evaluate the clinical usefulness of a newly developed screening program, the VisuBit™ Quick test, based on the Rarebit perimetric technique (Frisén 2002). Methods Twenty‐one subjects (32 eyes), 6 males and 15 females, median age 47 years (27‐67), were examined using the VisuBit Quick and Full test, both including the Fovea test (4x3°visual field) and the Field test (30x20° visual field). Two subjects had amblyopia in one eye, one of these had normal visual acuity in the other eye and one had a history of central serous retinopathy in one eye, 2 subjects had a history of optic neuritis in both eyes and 2 had glaucoma in both eyes. All other eyes were healthy and had normal visual acuity. Results The correlation coefficients between number of unperceived stimuli in the Quick and the Full test were 0.95 in the Fovea and in the 0.86 Field test. In the Quick Field test more than 4 unperceived stimuli predicted a subnormal result (MHR < 90%; Martin & Wanger 2004) in the Full Test. In the Fovea Test more than 2 unperceived stimuli predicted a subnormal results (MHR < 97%; Nilsson et al 2007). The positive and negative predictive values for the Quick Fovea test were 0.95 and 0.77, respectively. Corresponding values for the Quick Field test were 0.95 and 0.85. Conclusion The findings in this pilotstudy indicate that this implementation of the Rarebit perimetric technique may be useful for rapid screening for visual disorders.