Export Ready — 

Comparative study of the differences between dynamic and normal strategies with Octopus 1-2-3

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Santos,R. M. O.
Publication Date: 1999
Other Authors: Cronemberger,S., Vieira Filho,H. M., Calixto,N.
Format: Article
Language: eng
Source: Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online)
Download full: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-27491999000600013
Summary: Purpose: To show the results of a comparative study between dynamic and normal strategies with Octopus 1-2-3. Methods: Automatic perimetry using the Octopus 1-2-3 with dynamic and normal strategies was performed on 24 glaucomatous patients (eight males and 16 females) within an average interval of six months between the two exams. All patients had previously submitted to at least one automatic perimetry with the Octopus 1-2-3. The data compared, for both eyes, were: the patient's age, number of questions, mean sensitivity (MS), mean defect (MD), loss variance (LV), short-term fluctuation (SF) and the reliability factor (RF). In the statistical analyses through the paired t test, only the visual fields with RF less than 10 were included. The level of significance was equal to 5% (p < 0.05). Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the two strategies in relation to age, LV, SF and RF. However, there was statistically significant differences in the duration of the test, number of questions, MS and MD. The dynamic strategy showed a higher diffuse sensitivity and a lower mean defect than the normal strategy. Conclusions: Our results show that the threshold values measured by the dynamic strategy were in close agreement with the values obtained using the normal strategy in patients who have, or are suspected of having, glaucoma and whose visual fields are normal or borderline. They also confirm the claimed reduction in testing time. These results also suggest that, when comparing a visual field exam performed with the dynamic strategy to one performed with a normal strategy, it is necessary to be cautious in regard to MS and MD values.
id CBO-2_29c988a3b0676acff9ebd80e931e8e4e
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0004-27491999000600013
network_acronym_str CBO-2
network_name_str Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Comparative study of the differences between dynamic and normal strategies with Octopus 1-2-3Automated perimetryGlaucomaOctopus 1-2-3Purpose: To show the results of a comparative study between dynamic and normal strategies with Octopus 1-2-3. Methods: Automatic perimetry using the Octopus 1-2-3 with dynamic and normal strategies was performed on 24 glaucomatous patients (eight males and 16 females) within an average interval of six months between the two exams. All patients had previously submitted to at least one automatic perimetry with the Octopus 1-2-3. The data compared, for both eyes, were: the patient's age, number of questions, mean sensitivity (MS), mean defect (MD), loss variance (LV), short-term fluctuation (SF) and the reliability factor (RF). In the statistical analyses through the paired t test, only the visual fields with RF less than 10 were included. The level of significance was equal to 5% (p < 0.05). Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the two strategies in relation to age, LV, SF and RF. However, there was statistically significant differences in the duration of the test, number of questions, MS and MD. The dynamic strategy showed a higher diffuse sensitivity and a lower mean defect than the normal strategy. Conclusions: Our results show that the threshold values measured by the dynamic strategy were in close agreement with the values obtained using the normal strategy in patients who have, or are suspected of having, glaucoma and whose visual fields are normal or borderline. They also confirm the claimed reduction in testing time. These results also suggest that, when comparing a visual field exam performed with the dynamic strategy to one performed with a normal strategy, it is necessary to be cautious in regard to MS and MD values.Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia1999-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-27491999000600013Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia v.62 n.6 1999reponame:Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online)instname:Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia (CBO)instacron:CBO10.1590/S0004-27491999000600013info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSantos,R. M. O.Cronemberger,S.Vieira Filho,H. M.Calixto,N.eng2010-07-13T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0004-27491999000600013Revistahttp://aboonline.org.br/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpaboonline@cbo.com.br||abo@cbo.com.br1678-29250004-2749opendoar:2010-07-13T00:00Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online) - Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia (CBO)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparative study of the differences between dynamic and normal strategies with Octopus 1-2-3
title Comparative study of the differences between dynamic and normal strategies with Octopus 1-2-3
spellingShingle Comparative study of the differences between dynamic and normal strategies with Octopus 1-2-3
Santos,R. M. O.
Automated perimetry
Glaucoma
Octopus 1-2-3
title_short Comparative study of the differences between dynamic and normal strategies with Octopus 1-2-3
title_full Comparative study of the differences between dynamic and normal strategies with Octopus 1-2-3
title_fullStr Comparative study of the differences between dynamic and normal strategies with Octopus 1-2-3
title_full_unstemmed Comparative study of the differences between dynamic and normal strategies with Octopus 1-2-3
title_sort Comparative study of the differences between dynamic and normal strategies with Octopus 1-2-3
author Santos,R. M. O.
author_facet Santos,R. M. O.
Cronemberger,S.
Vieira Filho,H. M.
Calixto,N.
author_role author
author2 Cronemberger,S.
Vieira Filho,H. M.
Calixto,N.
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Santos,R. M. O.
Cronemberger,S.
Vieira Filho,H. M.
Calixto,N.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Automated perimetry
Glaucoma
Octopus 1-2-3
topic Automated perimetry
Glaucoma
Octopus 1-2-3
description Purpose: To show the results of a comparative study between dynamic and normal strategies with Octopus 1-2-3. Methods: Automatic perimetry using the Octopus 1-2-3 with dynamic and normal strategies was performed on 24 glaucomatous patients (eight males and 16 females) within an average interval of six months between the two exams. All patients had previously submitted to at least one automatic perimetry with the Octopus 1-2-3. The data compared, for both eyes, were: the patient's age, number of questions, mean sensitivity (MS), mean defect (MD), loss variance (LV), short-term fluctuation (SF) and the reliability factor (RF). In the statistical analyses through the paired t test, only the visual fields with RF less than 10 were included. The level of significance was equal to 5% (p < 0.05). Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the two strategies in relation to age, LV, SF and RF. However, there was statistically significant differences in the duration of the test, number of questions, MS and MD. The dynamic strategy showed a higher diffuse sensitivity and a lower mean defect than the normal strategy. Conclusions: Our results show that the threshold values measured by the dynamic strategy were in close agreement with the values obtained using the normal strategy in patients who have, or are suspected of having, glaucoma and whose visual fields are normal or borderline. They also confirm the claimed reduction in testing time. These results also suggest that, when comparing a visual field exam performed with the dynamic strategy to one performed with a normal strategy, it is necessary to be cautious in regard to MS and MD values.
publishDate 1999
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 1999-12-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-27491999000600013
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-27491999000600013
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S0004-27491999000600013
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia v.62 n.6 1999
reponame:Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online)
instname:Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia (CBO)
instacron:CBO
instname_str Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia (CBO)
instacron_str CBO
institution CBO
reponame_str Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online)
collection Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online) - Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia (CBO)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv aboonline@cbo.com.br||abo@cbo.com.br
_version_ 1754209019978842112