Anmeldung zur Tagung
Registration
Grußwort
Invitation
Themen
Topics
Allgemeiner Ablauf
General overview
Wissenschaftliches Programm
Scientific program
Kurse
Courses
Symposien
Symposiums
Frühstück mit Spezialisten
Breakfast with specialists
Arzthelferinnen-Fortbildung
Rahmenprogramm
Social program
DOG Information
DOG Information
Allgemeine Informationen
General Information
Autorenindex
Index of Authors
Ausstellerliste
Exhibitors
Sponsoren
Sponsors
Teilnahmegebühren
Registration fees
Impressum
Age-related influence of different stimulus velocities in automated kinetic perimetry
Wabbels B., Dingeldey C., Kolling G.
University-Eye Hospital Heidelberg, INF 400, D-69120 Heidelberg
Introduction: Goldmann-perimetry is still the gold standard for
kinetic perimetry, but as it is performed manually standardization is
difficult. In this study, we evaluated the influence of different stimulus
velocities on the results of automated kinetic perimetry in various age
groups.
Methods: 62 visually normal subjects (3 age groups: 20-39 years,
40-59 years and over 60 years) with no history of eye disease other than
refractive error were tested with stimuli III/4, I/4, I/2, I/1 using a
Twinfieldperimeter. Stimuli were presented at meridians of 0°, 30°,
60°, .... 330° at velocities of 1-7°/s (in randomized order).
The surface area inside the isopters was calculated for each subject,
stimulus and velocity. Area of velocity 1°/s was set as 100% and areas
of other velocities for the corresponding stimulus were given as a percentage
of 1°/s-area.
Results: Velocities of 6 and 7 °/s were too high for most subjects
with either stimulus. Surface area decreased with increasing velocity
for all stimuli and in every age group. From 1 to 5°/s surface areas
decreased to ca. 93% for stimulus III4 and to 89 to 91% for stimulus I4
respectively (not age-dependant). Concerning the stimulus I2 surface areas
decreased to 78% (20-39), 68% (40-59) and 55% (60+) and for stimulus I1
to 37%, 21% and 2% respectively. A marked decrease in surface area started
at 3°/s for I/1 and 3-4°/s for I/2. Stimuli III/4 and I/4 were
less affected (until 5°/s). The influence of velocity was more pronounced
with increasing age for central isopters.
Conclusion: In this study,
we confirmed the original recommendations of Goldmann: 2°/s is well
adapted for all age groups and stimuli. Even with 3°/s no reliable
testing was possible with stimulus I1. There is strong evidence that the
influence of higher stimulus velocities is even more pronounced in the
elderly. The use of automated kinetic perimetry could minimize negative
influences of different examiners in all age groups using a constant slower
rate of movement (2°/s), especially for the inner isopters.