Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Purpose. The aim of this study was to assess the sensitivity and specificity of a 22point Multifixation Campimeter for the detection of glaucoma!ous visual field loss b> comparison with the Humphrey Visual Filed Analyzer (HVFA) Methods. The Multifixation Campimeter is a tangent screen with numbered fixation targets arranged around a central window. A disc inside the chart is printed with stimuli which are dark contrast on a white back ground When the disc is dialled, the chosen stimulus briefly appears in the window As the patient ooks at each fixation target in turn the central stimulus is positioned into known locations within the visual field The 22-point Campimeter tests points within the paracentral, Bjerrum and nasal areas of the visual field. It uses a 10% and 25% stimulus or the detection of visual field loss Twenty two normal eyes and 58 glaucomatous eyes were examined with the Campimeter and with the Humphrey 24-2 STATPAC p ogram The field loss detected with the HVFA was assessed using the Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study Score. The field results from the Campimeter were assessed as normal or abnormal using a database of normal values which was compiled in earlier studies. The results of each method were compared. Results. The campimeter p-oduced one false positive field in the group of normal eyes giving a specificity of 95% Of the 58 glaucomatous eyes, 24 showed mild field loss. 24 moderate field loss end 10 severe field loss. The rate of false negatives in these groups were- mild 6'24, moderate 4/24, severe 0/24 The sensitivity of the chart was 75% for mild. 83% for moderate and 100% for severe visual field loss Conclusion The 22-point multifixation campimeter may be useful for the detection of visual field loss when other methods are not practicable.

Type

Journal article

Journal

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Publication Date

01/12/1997

Volume

38