Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, Vol 37, 444-450, Copyright © 1996 by Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology

ARTICLES AND REPORTS

Influence of fixation accuracy on threshold variability in patients with open angle glaucoma

DB Henson, J Evans, BC Chauhan and C Lane
Department of Ophthalmology, University of Manchester, United Kingdom.

PURPOSE. To evaluate the contribution that fixation errors make to the overall variability of perimetric responses in patients with glaucoma. METHODS. Frequency of seeing curves were established, with and without fixation error correction, at two locations in each of 14 patients with glaucoma and good visual acuity. One location corresponded to a relatively normal region of the visual field, whereas the second corresponded to a region in which there was a sensitivity deficit. All patients had an acuity of better than 20/63 (except one whose acuity was 20/100). The locations of the first and fourth Purkinje images of a collimated infrared source were used to give a measure of eye position, during each stimulus presentation (accuracy 10 minutes of arc). RESULTS. Considerable variation was found in patient fixation accuracy. In the worst case, fixation was within 30 minutes of the target in only 7% of presentations whereas in the best, it was within this range in more than 60%. No relationship was found between accuracy of fixation and extent of loss. The gradient of the frequency of seeing curve was found to be shallow at regions of reduced sensitivity, a finding that supports the recognized relationship between variability and sensitivity deficit. A recalculation of the frequency of seeing curves, using only those responses in which the patient's fixation was within a specified range ( < 60 minutes of arc), did not show a meaningful reduction in variability at either location. CONCLUSIONS. It is concluded that fixation errors, though contributing to variability, are not the major cause of the increased variability seen at locations with reduced sensitivity.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. S. Kim, J. J. McAnany, K. R. Alexander, and G. A. Fishman Intersession Repeatability of Humphrey Perimetry Measurements in Patients with Retinitis Pigmentosa Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., October 1, 2007; 48(10): 4720 - 4724. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Jaworski, A. Gentle, A. J. Zele, A. J. Vingrys, and N. A. McBrien Altered visual sensitivity in axial high myopia: a local postreceptoral phenomenon? Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., August 1, 2006; 47(8): 3695 - 3702. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E D Gilmore, C Hudson, R K Nrusimhadevara, and P T Harvey Frequency of seeing characteristics of the short wavelength sensitive visual pathway in clinically normal subjects and diabetic patients with focal sensitivity loss Br. J. Ophthalmol., November 1, 2005; 89(11): 1462 - 1467. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. H. Swanson, J. Felius, and F. Pan Perimetric Defects and Ganglion Cell Damage: Interpreting Linear Relations Using a Two-Stage Neural Model Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., February 1, 2004; 45(2): 466 - 472. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. J Foster, R. Buhrmann, H. A Quigley, and G. J Johnson The definition and classification of glaucoma in prevalence surveys Br. J. Ophthalmol., February 1, 2002; 86(2): 238 - 242. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. G. D. Spry, C. A. Johnson, A. M. McKendrick, and A. Turpin Variability Components of Standard Automated Perimetry and Frequency-Doubling Technology Perimetry Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., May 1, 2001; 42(6): 1404 - 1410. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				J. L. Keltner, C. A. Johnson, J. M. Quigg, K. E. Cello, M. A. Kass, M. O. Gordon, and for the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study Group Confirmation of Visual Field Abnormalities in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study Arch Ophthalmol, September 1, 2000; 118(9): 1187 - 1194. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. P Crabb, A. C Viswanathan, A. I McNaught, D. Poinoosawmy, F. W Fitzke, and R. A Hitchings Simulating binocular visual field status in glaucoma Br. J. Ophthalmol., November 1, 1998; 82(11): 1236 - 1241. [Abstract] [Full Text]