Purchase this article with an account.
Phillip Bedggood, Selwyn Marc Prea, Yu Xiang George Kong, Algis J. Vingrys; Scaling the size of perimetric stimuli reduces variability and returns constant thresholds across the visual field. Journal of Vision 2021;21(11):2. https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.21.11.2.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
The conventional stimulus for standard automated perimetry is fixed in size, giving elevated contrast thresholds and reduced test reliability in the periphery. Here, we test the hypothesis that appropriate scaling of the size of perimetric stimuli will return fixed thresholds and reduced variability across the visual field. We derived frequency-of-seeing (FOS) curves in five healthy subjects at central (3 degrees) and peripheral (27 degrees) locations with a method of constant stimuli (MOCS) using a desktop LCD display. FOS curves for a Goldmann III (GIII) stimulus were compared with those for size scaled spots. To consider clinical translation, we tested a further five healthy subjects (22–24 years) with the Melbourne Rapid Fields (MRF) tablet perimeter at several locations spanning 1 degree to 25 degrees from fixation, deriving FOS curves (MOCS) and also conducting repeated adaptive clinical thresholding to assess intra- and interobserver variability. We found that GIII contrast thresholds were significantly elevated in the periphery compared with the parafovea, with concomitant reduction of FOS slope. Using appropriately size scaled spots, threshold and slope differences between these locations were significantly reduced. FOS data collected with the tablet perimeter confirmed that size scaling confers broad equivalence of the shape of the FOS curve across the visual field. Repeated adaptive thresholding with size scaled stimuli gave relatively constant intra-observer variability across the visual field, which compares favorably with published normative data obtained with the GIII stimulus. The reduced variability will improve signal-to-noise ratio for correct classification of normal visual field test results, whereas the lower contrast thresholds yield greater dynamic range, which should improve the ability to reliably monitor moderate defects.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only