Visual field assessment in glaucoma: comparative evaluation of manual kinetic Goldmann perimetry and automated static perimetry.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the detection and assessment of progression of visual field defects in primary open-angle glaucoma with manual suprathreshold perimetry on Goldmann perimeter and automated static threshold perimetry on Humphery visual field (HVF) analyzer.


METHODS
105 eyes of 54 patients of primary open-angle glaucoma were followed up with 3-monthly perimetry on Goldmann perimeter and HVF analyzer, for a period of 9 months.


RESULTS
HVF analyzer picked up visual field defects in 48 (46%) eyes whereas Goldmann perimeter picked up visual field defects in 26 (25%) eyes. HVF analyzer demonstrated progression in 14 eyes whereas Goldmann perimeter detected progression in 7 eyes during follow up of 9 months.


CONCLUSIONS
HVF analyzer is superior to Goldmann perimeter to document and to demonstrate progression of visual field defects in primary open-angle glaucoma.
Agarwal
H C
HC
Dr. Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi-110 029, India.
Gulati
V
V
Sihota
R
R
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001330:Electronic Data Processing; D005260:Female; D005902:Glaucoma, Open-Angle / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000503:physiopathology*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D058609:Visual Field Tests / Q000379:methods*; D014794:Visual Fields / Q000502:physiology