The Ability of Healthy Volunteers to Simulate a Neurologic Field Defect on Automated Perimetry

Objective To determine if volunteers can simulate and reproduce 3 types of neurologic field defects: hemianopia, quadrantanopia, and central scotoma. Design Cross-sectional study. Participants Thirty healthy volunteers new to perimetry (including automated perimetry). Methods After informed consent,...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.) Minn.), 2014-03, Vol.121 (3), p.759-762
Hauptverfasser: Ghate, Deepta, MBBS, MD, Bodnarchuk, Brian, MD, Sanders, Sheila, MD, Deokule, Sunil, MBBS, Kedar, Sachin, MBBS, MD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 762
container_issue 3
container_start_page 759
container_title Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.)
container_volume 121
creator Ghate, Deepta, MBBS, MD
Bodnarchuk, Brian, MD
Sanders, Sheila, MD
Deokule, Sunil, MBBS
Kedar, Sachin, MBBS, MD
description Objective To determine if volunteers can simulate and reproduce 3 types of neurologic field defects: hemianopia, quadrantanopia, and central scotoma. Design Cross-sectional study. Participants Thirty healthy volunteers new to perimetry (including automated perimetry). Methods After informed consent, volunteers were randomized to 1 of the 3 visual field defects listed above. All visual field testing was performed on the right eye using the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA) SITA Fast 24-2 protocol. Each volunteer was provided with standard new patient instructions and was shown a diagram of the defect to be simulated. Two sets of visual fields were performed on the right eye with 10 minutes between tests. Three experts used the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study reading center criteria and determined if the simulation was successful. Main Outcome Measures Proportion of volunteers able to simulate the assigned visual field. Results All 10 volunteers (100%) successfully simulated a hemianopia on the first and second fields. All 10 volunteers (100%) simulated a quadrantanopia on the first field and 9 (90%) did so on the second field. Eight volunteers (80%) successfully simulated a central scotoma in the first field and all 10 (100%) did so on in the second field. Reliability criteria were excellent. Forty-seven fields (78%) had 0 fixation losses, 48 (80%) had 0 false-positive results, and 44 (73%) had 0 false-negative results. Conclusions It is easy to simulate reproducible and reliable neurologic field defects on automated perimetry using HFA.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.10.024
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1504150006</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0161642013009494</els_id><sourcerecordid>1504150006</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-419c4028df76f53a81ada50d3744590d3b9839131158b5e2a58559fecdd4ac573</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU1v1DAQQC0EotvCP0DIRy5ZPLGdTS5Iq0JbpAqQWjhiee0J68WJt7aDlH-Poy0cuHCwRhq9-fAbQl4BWwOD5u1hHY77vNfrmgEvqTWrxROyAim6SmyAPyWrgkHViJqdkfOUDoyxpuHiOTmrBQfRcrki3-_3SLc7512eaejpDWqf9zP9Fvw0ZsSYaA70zg2T1xmppp9wisGHH87QK4fe0vfYo8k0jHQ75TAUytIvGN2AOc4vyLNe-4QvH-MF-Xr14f7yprr9fP3xcntbGQGbXAnojGB1a_tN00uuW9BWS2b5RgjZlbjrWt4BB5DtTmKtZStlV-ZaK7SRG35B3pz6HmN4mDBlNbhk0Hs9YpiSAslEeUVAQcUJNTGkFLFXx7KsjrMCphaz6qBOZtVidskWs6Xs9eOEaTeg_Vv0R2UB3p0ALP_85TCqZByOBq2LRZCywf1vwr8NjHejM9r_xBnTIUxxLA4VqFQrpu6W6y7HBc5YJzrBfwOBmJ-3</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1504150006</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Ability of Healthy Volunteers to Simulate a Neurologic Field Defect on Automated Perimetry</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Ghate, Deepta, MBBS, MD ; Bodnarchuk, Brian, MD ; Sanders, Sheila, MD ; Deokule, Sunil, MBBS ; Kedar, Sachin, MBBS, MD</creator><creatorcontrib>Ghate, Deepta, MBBS, MD ; Bodnarchuk, Brian, MD ; Sanders, Sheila, MD ; Deokule, Sunil, MBBS ; Kedar, Sachin, MBBS, MD</creatorcontrib><description>Objective To determine if volunteers can simulate and reproduce 3 types of neurologic field defects: hemianopia, quadrantanopia, and central scotoma. Design Cross-sectional study. Participants Thirty healthy volunteers new to perimetry (including automated perimetry). Methods After informed consent, volunteers were randomized to 1 of the 3 visual field defects listed above. All visual field testing was performed on the right eye using the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA) SITA Fast 24-2 protocol. Each volunteer was provided with standard new patient instructions and was shown a diagram of the defect to be simulated. Two sets of visual fields were performed on the right eye with 10 minutes between tests. Three experts used the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study reading center criteria and determined if the simulation was successful. Main Outcome Measures Proportion of volunteers able to simulate the assigned visual field. Results All 10 volunteers (100%) successfully simulated a hemianopia on the first and second fields. All 10 volunteers (100%) simulated a quadrantanopia on the first field and 9 (90%) did so on the second field. Eight volunteers (80%) successfully simulated a central scotoma in the first field and all 10 (100%) did so on in the second field. Reliability criteria were excellent. Forty-seven fields (78%) had 0 fixation losses, 48 (80%) had 0 false-positive results, and 44 (73%) had 0 false-negative results. Conclusions It is easy to simulate reproducible and reliable neurologic field defects on automated perimetry using HFA.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0161-6420</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1549-4713</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.10.024</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24314835</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; False Positive Reactions ; Female ; Healthy Volunteers ; Hemianopsia ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Ophthalmology ; Patient Simulation ; Predictive Value of Tests ; Reproducibility of Results ; Scotoma ; Visual Field Tests - standards ; Visual Fields ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.), 2014-03, Vol.121 (3), p.759-762</ispartof><rights>American Academy of Ophthalmology</rights><rights>2014 American Academy of Ophthalmology</rights><rights>Copyright © 2014 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-419c4028df76f53a81ada50d3744590d3b9839131158b5e2a58559fecdd4ac573</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-419c4028df76f53a81ada50d3744590d3b9839131158b5e2a58559fecdd4ac573</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.10.024$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,3537,27905,27906,45976</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24314835$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ghate, Deepta, MBBS, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bodnarchuk, Brian, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sanders, Sheila, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deokule, Sunil, MBBS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kedar, Sachin, MBBS, MD</creatorcontrib><title>The Ability of Healthy Volunteers to Simulate a Neurologic Field Defect on Automated Perimetry</title><title>Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.)</title><addtitle>Ophthalmology</addtitle><description>Objective To determine if volunteers can simulate and reproduce 3 types of neurologic field defects: hemianopia, quadrantanopia, and central scotoma. Design Cross-sectional study. Participants Thirty healthy volunteers new to perimetry (including automated perimetry). Methods After informed consent, volunteers were randomized to 1 of the 3 visual field defects listed above. All visual field testing was performed on the right eye using the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA) SITA Fast 24-2 protocol. Each volunteer was provided with standard new patient instructions and was shown a diagram of the defect to be simulated. Two sets of visual fields were performed on the right eye with 10 minutes between tests. Three experts used the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study reading center criteria and determined if the simulation was successful. Main Outcome Measures Proportion of volunteers able to simulate the assigned visual field. Results All 10 volunteers (100%) successfully simulated a hemianopia on the first and second fields. All 10 volunteers (100%) simulated a quadrantanopia on the first field and 9 (90%) did so on the second field. Eight volunteers (80%) successfully simulated a central scotoma in the first field and all 10 (100%) did so on in the second field. Reliability criteria were excellent. Forty-seven fields (78%) had 0 fixation losses, 48 (80%) had 0 false-positive results, and 44 (73%) had 0 false-negative results. Conclusions It is easy to simulate reproducible and reliable neurologic field defects on automated perimetry using HFA.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>False Positive Reactions</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Healthy Volunteers</subject><subject>Hemianopsia</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Ophthalmology</subject><subject>Patient Simulation</subject><subject>Predictive Value of Tests</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Scotoma</subject><subject>Visual Field Tests - standards</subject><subject>Visual Fields</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0161-6420</issn><issn>1549-4713</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkU1v1DAQQC0EotvCP0DIRy5ZPLGdTS5Iq0JbpAqQWjhiee0J68WJt7aDlH-Poy0cuHCwRhq9-fAbQl4BWwOD5u1hHY77vNfrmgEvqTWrxROyAim6SmyAPyWrgkHViJqdkfOUDoyxpuHiOTmrBQfRcrki3-_3SLc7512eaejpDWqf9zP9Fvw0ZsSYaA70zg2T1xmppp9wisGHH87QK4fe0vfYo8k0jHQ75TAUytIvGN2AOc4vyLNe-4QvH-MF-Xr14f7yprr9fP3xcntbGQGbXAnojGB1a_tN00uuW9BWS2b5RgjZlbjrWt4BB5DtTmKtZStlV-ZaK7SRG35B3pz6HmN4mDBlNbhk0Hs9YpiSAslEeUVAQcUJNTGkFLFXx7KsjrMCphaz6qBOZtVidskWs6Xs9eOEaTeg_Vv0R2UB3p0ALP_85TCqZByOBq2LRZCywf1vwr8NjHejM9r_xBnTIUxxLA4VqFQrpu6W6y7HBc5YJzrBfwOBmJ-3</recordid><startdate>20140301</startdate><enddate>20140301</enddate><creator>Ghate, Deepta, MBBS, MD</creator><creator>Bodnarchuk, Brian, MD</creator><creator>Sanders, Sheila, MD</creator><creator>Deokule, Sunil, MBBS</creator><creator>Kedar, Sachin, MBBS, MD</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140301</creationdate><title>The Ability of Healthy Volunteers to Simulate a Neurologic Field Defect on Automated Perimetry</title><author>Ghate, Deepta, MBBS, MD ; Bodnarchuk, Brian, MD ; Sanders, Sheila, MD ; Deokule, Sunil, MBBS ; Kedar, Sachin, MBBS, MD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-419c4028df76f53a81ada50d3744590d3b9839131158b5e2a58559fecdd4ac573</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>False Positive Reactions</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Healthy Volunteers</topic><topic>Hemianopsia</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Ophthalmology</topic><topic>Patient Simulation</topic><topic>Predictive Value of Tests</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Scotoma</topic><topic>Visual Field Tests - standards</topic><topic>Visual Fields</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ghate, Deepta, MBBS, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bodnarchuk, Brian, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sanders, Sheila, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deokule, Sunil, MBBS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kedar, Sachin, MBBS, MD</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ghate, Deepta, MBBS, MD</au><au>Bodnarchuk, Brian, MD</au><au>Sanders, Sheila, MD</au><au>Deokule, Sunil, MBBS</au><au>Kedar, Sachin, MBBS, MD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Ability of Healthy Volunteers to Simulate a Neurologic Field Defect on Automated Perimetry</atitle><jtitle>Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.)</jtitle><addtitle>Ophthalmology</addtitle><date>2014-03-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>121</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>759</spage><epage>762</epage><pages>759-762</pages><issn>0161-6420</issn><eissn>1549-4713</eissn><abstract>Objective To determine if volunteers can simulate and reproduce 3 types of neurologic field defects: hemianopia, quadrantanopia, and central scotoma. Design Cross-sectional study. Participants Thirty healthy volunteers new to perimetry (including automated perimetry). Methods After informed consent, volunteers were randomized to 1 of the 3 visual field defects listed above. All visual field testing was performed on the right eye using the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA) SITA Fast 24-2 protocol. Each volunteer was provided with standard new patient instructions and was shown a diagram of the defect to be simulated. Two sets of visual fields were performed on the right eye with 10 minutes between tests. Three experts used the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study reading center criteria and determined if the simulation was successful. Main Outcome Measures Proportion of volunteers able to simulate the assigned visual field. Results All 10 volunteers (100%) successfully simulated a hemianopia on the first and second fields. All 10 volunteers (100%) simulated a quadrantanopia on the first field and 9 (90%) did so on the second field. Eight volunteers (80%) successfully simulated a central scotoma in the first field and all 10 (100%) did so on in the second field. Reliability criteria were excellent. Forty-seven fields (78%) had 0 fixation losses, 48 (80%) had 0 false-positive results, and 44 (73%) had 0 false-negative results. Conclusions It is easy to simulate reproducible and reliable neurologic field defects on automated perimetry using HFA.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>24314835</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.10.024</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0161-6420
ispartof Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.), 2014-03, Vol.121 (3), p.759-762
issn 0161-6420
1549-4713
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1504150006
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Cross-Sectional Studies
False Positive Reactions
Female
Healthy Volunteers
Hemianopsia
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Ophthalmology
Patient Simulation
Predictive Value of Tests
Reproducibility of Results
Scotoma
Visual Field Tests - standards
Visual Fields
Young Adult
title The Ability of Healthy Volunteers to Simulate a Neurologic Field Defect on Automated Perimetry
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T12%3A38%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Ability%20of%20Healthy%20Volunteers%20to%20Simulate%20a%20Neurologic%20Field%20Defect%20on%20Automated%20Perimetry&rft.jtitle=Ophthalmology%20(Rochester,%20Minn.)&rft.au=Ghate,%20Deepta,%20MBBS,%20MD&rft.date=2014-03-01&rft.volume=121&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=759&rft.epage=762&rft.pages=759-762&rft.issn=0161-6420&rft.eissn=1549-4713&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.10.024&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1504150006%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1504150006&rft_id=info:pmid/24314835&rft_els_id=S0161642013009494&rfr_iscdi=true