[Reproducibility of central visual field testing using kinetic or computerized static perimetry (author's transl)].
Under controlled conditions the differences between duplicated examinations with the Goldmann kinetic perimeter and the Krakau/Heijl static computerized perimeter were evaluated. Kinetic visual fields were obtained independently by two well trained examiners and duplicate examinations were performed by computer perimetry. The differences between the two examinations were statistically evaluated using quantitative criteria. The agreement between first and second examination--based on normal and pathologic findings--was 72% for the Goldmann and 88% for the computer perimeter. The greater reproducibility of central visual field testing with the computer perimeter is most probably due to the subjectivity of the observer in the kinetic manual technique. The computer obviously represents a standardized observer using a constant strategy with a fixed time course. The computerized perimeter was easy to operate and did not require a specially trained technician. All the patients in whom kinetic visual field testing was possible were able to undergo computerized perimetry.