Static vs dynamic visual field evaluation; with emphasis on the utility of the Friedmann Visual Field Analyzer.
This paper contrasts static and dynamic perimetry, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of each. A type of static perimetry, the Friedmann Visual Field Analyzer, is discussed in some detail. A clinical study, comparing the sensitivity of the Friedmann Visual Field Analyzer and B&L Autoplot in detecting field defects in known glaucoma patients, is presented. The results of this study support the notion that static fields (utilizing the FVFA) are significantly more sensitive than dynamic fields (utilizing the B&L Autoplot) in detecting field defects in known glaucoma patients.
D003951:Diagnostic Errors; D005069:Evaluation Studies as Topic; D005260:Female; D005901:Glaucoma / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000503:physiopathology; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D058609:Visual Field Tests / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D014794:Visual Fields