Visual field assessment in glaucoma: Comparative evaluation of manual kinetic Goldmann perimetry and automated static perimetry

Harish C. Agarwal, V. Gulati, Ramanjit Sihota

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

10 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose: 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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)301-306
Number of pages6
JournalIndian journal of ophthalmology
Volume48
Issue number4
StatePublished - Dec 2000
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Goldmann perimeter
  • Humphrey visual field analyzer
  • Primary open-angle glaucoma
  • Visual field defects

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Visual field assessment in glaucoma: Comparative evaluation of manual kinetic Goldmann perimetry and automated static perimetry'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this