IOVS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


(Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science. 2005;46:2755-2759.)
© 2005 by The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
DOI:  10.1167/iovs.05-0006

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Musch, D. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Musch, D. C.

Converting to SITA-Standard from Full-Threshold Visual Field Testing in the Follow-up Phase of a Clinical Trial

David C. Musch,1,2 Brenda W. Gillespie,3 Bonnie M. Motyka,3 Leslie M. Niziol,1 Richard P. Mills,4 Paul R. Lichter1 on behalf of the CIGTS Study Group5

1From the Departments of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, 2Epidemiology, and 3Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; and the 4Department of Ophthalmology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.

PURPOSE. To evaluate the impact of converting from Humphrey 24-2 full-threshold (FT) visual field (VF) testing to SITA-Standard (SS) VF testing during the follow-up phase of a clinical trial.

METHODS. VF data were obtained from 243 patients in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study (CIGTS) who had follow-up visits in 2004. FT and SS VF tests were performed in random order on the same day.

RESULTS. The average duration of the SS test (6.3 minutes) was shorter (P < 0.0001, paired t-test) than the FT test (11.8 minutes). The mean deviation did not differ between SS and FT testing. A small difference was found in the pattern SD (PSD) (P = 0.02). The mean CIGTS score from the FT test (4.5) was significantly lower (P < 0.0001) than the mean CIGTS score from the SS test (6.0). Although the two tests yielded identical Glaucoma Hemifield Test (GHT) results in 179 patients (76%), 16 patients had a normal GHT result on FT testing and an SS test result that was outside normal limits. Six patients had the reverse finding. The most significant factor associated with an increased (positive) difference between the CIGTS VF score generated from SS and FT testing was conducting the FT test first (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS. Although SS and FT testing yielded very similar mean deviation results, the CIGTS VF score and GHT differed between SS and FT tests. Changing the approach used to measuring a study’s primary VF outcome should be accompanied by a critical evaluation of the change’s impact.





This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Arch OphthalmolHome page
P. R. Lichter, D. C. Musch, and N. K. Janz
The Investigators' Perspective on the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study (CIGTS)
Arch Ophthalmol, January 1, 2008; 126(1): 122 - 124.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2005 by the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology