Comparison of Mean Deviation Between Integrated Binocular Visual Field and Monocular Visual Field.
10.3341/jkos.2013.54.6.919
- Author:
Yeoun Sook CHUN
1
;
In Ki PARK
Author Information
1. Department of Ophthalmology, Chung-Ang University Hospital, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Glaucoma;
Integrated binocular visual field;
Mean deviation
- MeSH:
Eye;
Glaucoma;
Humans;
Telescopes;
Visual Field Tests;
Visual Fields
- From:Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society
2013;54(6):919-926
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: To compare the mean deviation (MD) between monocular and integrated binocular visual field (BVF). METHODS: Thirty-six patients with glaucoma in at least 1 eye were recruited for the present study. Seventy-two threshold sensitivities of the BVF were obtained without additional visual field test by the Best Location and Binocular Summation methods using the 2 monocular visual fields of central 30degrees. The MD of the BVF was obtained by comparison to the value distribution in the age-matched population with normal BVF. After defining the better eye with the better MD value from the 2 eyes, comparison of the MDs between individual eyes and the integrated BVF were assessed. In addition, the MDs between the integrated BVF and actual BVF were compared in 11 patients. RESULTS: In patients with a mean age of 58.7 years, the MD of the better eye was -2.3 dB, and the worse eye was -4.9 dB (p < 0.01). There was a significant difference between the 2 MDs derived from Best Location and Binocular Summation (-1.7 and -2.0 dB, respectively p = 0.045). The MDs according to BVF more improved than the better eye (p < 0.01 for both). There was no significant difference in MDs between integrated BVF and actual BVF (-1.9 vs -2.0, -2.3 vs -2.0, respectively p > 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: The integrated BVF more improved than the better eye. When providing guidance to glaucoma patients regarding therapeutic decisions considering the MD of IVF may be important.
