Open AccessComparison of imo and Humphrey field analyzer perimeters in glaucomatous eyes
Author(s) -
Yousuke Nakai,
Yuko Shono,
Kaori Taoka,
Yousuke Nakai
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
international journal of ophthalmology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.634
H-Index - 29
eISSN - 2227-4898
pISSN - 2222-3959
DOI - 10.18240/ijo.2021.12.11
Subject(s) - perimeter , standard deviation , absolute deviation , visual field , medicine , ophthalmology , glaucoma , decibel , mean difference , spectrum analyzer , optometry , optics , mathematics , statistics , audiology , physics , confidence interval , geometry
AIM: To compare the imo perimeter, a new portable head-mounted perimeter unit that enables both eyes to be examined quickly and simultaneously, with the Humphrey field analyzer (HFA) perimeter to investigate correlations and their diagnostic ability in glaucomatous eyes.METHODS: The performance of the equipment in 128 glaucomatous eyes and 40 normal eyes were tested. We investigated the correlations of mean deviation, pattern standard deviation, visual field index, and the sensitivity.RESULTS: Measurements of mean deviation (r=0.886, P<0.001), pattern standard deviation (r=0.814, P<0.001), and visual field index (r=0.871, P<0.001) in both perimeters were strongly and positively correlated. The sensitivities in the imo perimeter were 80.5% for mean deviation, 81.2% for pattern standard deviation, and 80.5% in visual field index; those in the HFA were 63.3% for mean deviation, 74.5% for pattern standard deviation, and 80.5% for visual field index. Both perimeters demonstrated high diagnostic ability.CONCLUSION: The parameters by the imo and HFA in glaucomatous eyes show strong positive correlations with favorable sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic ability. However, the difference between imo and HFA results increases with the increase in visual field disturbance.