title: [Full Threshold vs. SITA in glaucomatous patients undergoing automated perimetry for the first time].
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare the Full Threshold (FT) and SITA Standard (SS) strategies in glaucomatous patients undergoing automated perimetry for the first time.
  
  
  METHODS
  Thirty-one glaucomatous patients who had never undergone perimetry underwent automated perimetry (Humphrey, program 30-2) with both FT and SS on the same day, with an interval of at least 15 minutes. The order of the examination was randomized, and only one eye per patient was analyzed. Three analyses were performed: a) all the examinations, regardless of the order of application; b) only the first examinations; c) only the second examinations. In order to calculate the sensitivity of both strategies, the following criteria were used to define abnormality: glaucoma hemifield test (GHT) outside normal limits, pattern standard deviation (PSD) <5%, or a cluster of 3 adjacent points with p<5% at the pattern deviation probability plot.
  
  
  RESULTS
  When the results of all examinations were analyzed regardless of the order in which they were performed, the number of depressed points with p<0.5% in the pattern deviation probability map was significantly greater with SS (p=0.037), and the sensitivities were 87.1% for SS and 77.4% for FT (p=0.506). When only the first examinations were compared, there were no statistically significant differences regarding the number of depressed points, but the sensitivity of SS (100%) was significantly greater than that obtained with FT (70.6%) (p=0.048). When only the second examinations were compared, there were no statistically significant differences regarding the number of depressed points, and the sensitivities of SS (76.5%) and FT (85.7%) (p=0.664).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  SS may have a higher sensitivity than FT in glaucomatous patients undergoing automated perimetry for the first time. However, this difference tends to disappear in subsequent examinations.
authors.affiliation: Hospital das Clínicas, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brazil.
authors.forename: Rui Barroso
authors.initials: RB
authors.lastname: Schimiti
authors.forename: Enyr Saran
authors.initials: ES
authors.lastname: Arcieri
authors.forename: Enyr Saran
authors.initials: ES
authors.lastname: Arciery
authors.forename: Rodrigo Rezende
authors.initials: RR
authors.lastname: Avelino
authors.forename: Tiemi
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Matsuo
authors.forename: Vital Paulino
authors.initials: VP
authors.lastname: Costa
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000465:Algorithms; D016009:Chi-Square Distribution; D003936:Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted; D005260:Female; D005901:Glaucoma / Q000175:diagnosis*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D018709:Statistics, Nonparametric; D013997:Time Factors; D058609:Visual Field Tests / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D014794:Visual Fields / Q000502:physiology*