PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

P Asman

Publications and source records attributed to P Asman.

9 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1992

Glaucoma Hemifield Test. Automated visual field evaluation.

We have developed an algorithm, the Glaucoma Hemifield Test (GHT), for automated evaluation of single static threshold visual field test results in glaucoma. The GHT uses empirically determined limits of normality for up-down differences in the Statpac probability maps of the Humphrey Field Analyzer to detect localized visual field loss. It is also constructed to detect field loss that is symmetric around the horizontal meridian. Analysis is done in five corresponding pairs of sectors that are based on the normal anatomy of the retinal nerve fiber layer. Deviations from the age-corrected normal threshold in the most sensitive portions of the visual field are used to detect general reductions of sensitivity or abnormally high sensitivities. The GHT provides brief visual field evaluations printed on the field chart as plain text. The aim of this article is to describe the fundamentals of the analysis program and to provide clinical examples.

Adult↗
PubMed1992

Evaluation of methods for automated Hemifield analysis in perimetry.

A new aid to perimetric analysis, the Glaucoma Hemifield Test, primarily evaluates up-down differences in automated static visual field tests. We analyzed the visual fields of 163 eyes of 163 normal subjects and 77 eyes of 77 patients with glaucoma diagnosed on bases other than perimetry using the Glaucoma Hemifield Test and a similar, previously developed, hemifield analysis method. The performance of the Glaucoma Hemifield Test was compared with that of the earlier method and the differences in test design were evaluated individually. The Glaucoma Hemifield Test allowed significantly improved separation between the normal group and the group with glaucoma than did the earlier method. This improvement was due to an increase in sensitivity, and was associated with the use of test point significances instead of threshold values, and a large normal database alone in the determination of normal limits.

Adult↗
PubMed1992

Weighting according to location in computer-assisted glaucoma visual field analysis.

In recent years several aids for automated interpretation of visual field data have been suggested. We believed that incorporation of thorough knowledge of normal visual field variability would allow improvements in the performance of such aids since more attention would be paid to field results in areas with low physiological variability. Two visual field models for classification of fields in glaucoma based on comparisons of sensitivity values in the upper and lower hemifields and on analysis of test point clusters with diminished sensitivity were compared. Both models were constructed using logistic regression analysis in 101 normal eyes and 101 eyes with glaucoma. The first, more traditional model assumed Gaussian distributions of deviations from age-corrected normal thresholds and constant variability across the field (non-weighted model). The second model took into account empirically determined variability of pointwise threshold results and of cluster volumes in various visual field regions (weighted model). The two models were subsequently tested on an independent material of 163 normal eyes and 76 eyes with glaucoma. The weighted model gave significantly better classification of the fields in both materials. Accounting for physiological threshold variability can offer significant advantages in the construction of perimetric analysis aids for detection of glaucoma.

Adult↗
PubMed1992

Spatial analyses of glaucomatous visual fields; a comparison with traditional visual field indices.

Interpretation of numeric automated threshold visual field results is often difficult. A large amount of data is obtained for every single field tested. Various approaches to summarize this data have been suggested, most commonly the mean and standard deviation of departures from age-corrected normal threshold values. These visual field indices differ substantially from subjective field interpretation where spatial relationships are important. We have previously devised two methods for automated field interpretation which take spatial information into account--regional up-down comparisons and arcuate cluster analysis. We now studied the merits of using these new spatial methods and compared them to traditional visual field indices for discrimination between normal and glaucomatous field results. Central static 30 degree field results in 101 eyes of 101 normal subjects and 101 eyes of 101 patients with glaucoma were discriminated using logistic regression analysis. The best field classification was obtained with a spatial visual field model combining up-down differences and arcuate clusters. The advantages of the spatial model were confirmed in an independent material of 163 eyes of 163 normal subjects and 76 eyes of 76 patients with glaucoma where eyes with large field defects had been removed. In this material the spatial model gave 87% sensitivity and 83% specificity while the best non-spatial model gave 82% sensitivity and 80% specificity. Visual field interpretation in glaucoma may be significantly enhanced if detection is focused on circumscribed field loss rather than on averages of differential light sensitivities and similar indices which do not take spatial relationships into consideration.

Adult↗
PubMed1992

Computer-assisted interpretation of visual fields in glaucoma.

Visual field abnormality is an important diagnostic sign in glaucoma. Therefore, the presence or absence of visual field loss most often strongly influences diagnostic and therapeutic decisions in glaucoma management. Interpretation of visual field results is often difficult, however. Physiological variability of perimetric sensitivity values contributes to these difficulties. It has been our aim to develop improved computer-assisted methods for the recognition of early glaucomatous field loss. Our approach has therefore been to design techniques that are highly sensitive to small but significant departures from normality. We have investigated normal physiological variability in perimetric results and combined the obtained knowledge with pathophysiological models which are sensitive to the spatial patterns of field loss commonly seen in glaucoma. Thus, we have devised probability scores in order to take the complex physiological variability into account, and developed a hemifield analysis and an arcuate cluster analysis based on the normal anatomy of the retinal nerve fibre layer. A fundamental approach in the collection of normative data and the selection of glaucoma cases used in this project has been to select subjects using non-perimetric criteria (except for the removal of large field defects). Our objective here was to reduce bias from pre-conceived ideas of visual fields. This approach was used for (1) empirical studies on physiological variability, (2) development of analysis methods, and (3) evaluation of such methods. Glaucoma patients were selected based on evaluations of optic disc appearance. Normal subjects were never eliminated on the basis of perimetric results alone. The new methods developed in these studies have significantly improved discrimination between normal and glaucomatous field results, as compared with previously available techniques. Our results indicated that the usage of probability scores was the main source of this improvement, and that the location of observed field abnormalities and spatial modelling were other important factors. Candidate methods which did not properly combine spatial and normative analyses resulted in false positive defects in the mid-periphery and/or underestimated paracentral glaucomatous field defects. Similar approaches based on classification of visual field results in terms of significances, and on recognition of specific spatial patterns of field loss could be used for other groups of diseases having visual field abnormality as an important diagnostic sign.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Adult↗
PubMed1989

A clinical study of perimetric probability maps.

Perimetric probability maps depict visual field results in terms of the frequency with which the measured findings are seen in a normal population. We tested clinically the importance of the model of the normal visual field used to calculate such maps. Forty-one eyes of 41 normal subjects and 58 eyes of 46 glaucomatous patients were studied. Probability maps were calculated by means of two different models of the normal visual field. The first model assumed gaussian threshold distributions with constant variability across the field. The second used empirically determined nongaussian location-dependent threshold distributions. Probability maps using the empiric model allowed better separation between glaucomatous and normal eyes, and the number of significant points in normal subjects was in better agreement with the theoretically expected number. The gaussian model yielded an unacceptably high frequency of significant points in normal fields, particularly in the midperiphery. The clinical usefulness of perimetric probability maps depends critically on the choice of normal visual field model.

Adult↗
PubMed1989

Visual field interpretation with empiric probability maps.

Automated visual field charts may be difficult to interpret partly because of the magnitude and complex nature of normal threshold variability. We devised two types of empiric probability maps in which this variability is taken into account and the significances of measured threshold values are displayed. These maps are highly sensitive to nonobvious but significant paracentral field loss but will at the same time deemphasize false-positive patterns commonly found more peripherally. They also frequently show field defects before these are obvious in conventional threshold printouts. In addition, they differentiate between generalized loss of sensitivity and localized field defects.

Cataract↗
PubMed1988

Evaluation of adaptive spatial enhancement in suprathreshold visual field screening.

Sixty-three normal subjects and 94 abnormal patients, most of whom had glaucoma, were tested in the central visual field using a threshold-related, eccentricity-compensated, spatially adaptive suprathreshold screening program and a full-threshold program on the Humphrey field analyzer. The initial stimulus locations on the screening test were identical to those of the threshold test; additional screening stimuli were presented surrounding each missed initial stimulus. Surprisingly, this spatial enhancement strategy did not improve sensitivity or specificity rates of the screening beyond that achieved by considering the initial stimulus locations alone. Points missed during screening often showed a depressed sensitivity rate (measured threshold greater than 6 dB below the age-corrected normal reference value) in the same area of the threshold field. This was true in fields from abnormal and normal subjects. This finding of persistent shallow defects in the same test session among otherwise normal persons has disturbing implications for the importance of "confirmed" defects in the diagnosis of disease.

Adolescent↗