Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 4956
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 65  |  Issue : 11  |  Page : 1198-1202

Comparison of 30-2 Standard and Fast programs of Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm of Humphrey Field Analyzer for perimetry in patients with intracranial tumors

Department of Ophthalmology, PGIMER, Dr. RML Hospital, New Delhi, India

Correspondence Address:
Kanika Jain
S-293, Ground Floor, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi - 110 048
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_315_17

Rights and Permissions

Purpose: To find out whether 30-2 Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) Fast is comparable to 30-2 SITA Standard as a tool for perimetry among the patients with intracranial tumors. Methods: This was a prospective cross-sectional study involving 80 patients aged ≥18 years with imaging proven intracranial tumors and visual acuity better than 20/60. The patients underwent multiple visual field examinations using the two algorithms till consistent and repeatable results were obtained. Results: A total of 140 eyes of 80 patients were analyzed. Almost 60% of patients undergoing perimetry with SITA Standard required two or more sessions to obtain consistent results, whereas the same could be obtained in 81.42% with SITA Fast in the first session itself. Of 140 eyes, 70 eyes had recordable field defects and the rest had no defects as detected by either of the two algorithms. Mean deviation (MD) (P = 0.56), pattern standard deviation (PSD) (P = 0.22), visual field index (P = 0.83) and number of depressed points at P < 5%, 2%, 1%, and 0.5% on MD and PSD probability plots showed no statistically significant difference between two algorithms. Bland–Altman test showed that considerable variability existed between two algorithms. Conclusion: Perimetry performed by SITA Standard and SITA Fast algorithm of Humphrey Field Analyzer gives comparable results among the patients of intracranial tumors. Being more time efficient and with a shorter learning curve, SITA Fast my be recommended as a standard test for the purpose of perimetry among these patients.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded156    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal