A Comparison of Frequency Doubling Technology N-30 and Humphrey Field Analyzer Central 30-2.
- Author:
Ho Kyum KIM
1
;
Chan Yun KIM
;
Seong Soo KIM
;
Young Jae HONG
Author Information
1. The Institute of Vision Research, College of Medicine, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Frequency doubling perimetry;
Humphrey field analyzer;
Glaucoma;
Global index;
Visual field
- MeSH:
Female;
Glaucoma;
Humans;
Male;
Mass Screening;
Pupil;
Refractive Errors;
Sensitivity and Specificity;
Visual Field Tests;
Visual Fields
- From:Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society
2000;41(1):172-178
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
To evaluate the validity of FDT as a field analyzer by comparing to Humphrey perimetry with global indeces.FDT is known as a easy to use and convenient device, and there is restriction in pupil size and refractive error within 7 diopters. Forty-two glaucoma patients[79 eyes]were included in this study. All subjects performed FDT N-30 and HFA C30-2 apart 15 minutes on same day.Mean age of subjects were 48.18 +/-16.46years[from sixteen to seventy four years].Twenty-five men and seventeen women were included in this study. Test duration was 4.92 +/-1.08 minutes with FDT N-30 and 13.79 +/-3.32 minutes with HFA C30-2.In global index mean deviation was 14.63 +/-9.52 decibel with HFA C30-2 and 10.33 +/-6 .8 3 decibel with FDT.There was a significant correlation with coefficient correlation 0.940 between two tests[p<0.01]. Pattern standard deviation was 7.89 +/-3 .8 5 decibel in HFA C30-2 and 7.80 +/-3.13 in FDT.There was a significant correlation with coefficient correlation 0.702 between FDT PSD and HFA C30-2 PSD, and 0.691 between FDT PSD and HFA C30-2 CPSD, too[P<0.01].In diagnosing glaucoma, sensitivity and specificity of FDT was 86% and 70% respectively. FDT is thought to be convenient and effective screening tool in glaucoma patients for with a high correlation with HFA C30-2.
