Cargando…

Short-Listing the Program Choice for Perimetry in Neurological Conditions (PoPiN) Using Consensus Methods

BACKGROUND: Neurological conditions frequently cause visual field loss, commonly resulting in perimetry requests for suspected or known conditions. Currently there are no national guidelines for perimetry in neurological conditions. A wide choice of perimetry programs exists. An inappropriate progra...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hepworth, Lauren, Rowe, Fiona
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: White Rose University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7510368/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32999983
http://dx.doi.org/10.22599/bioj.143
_version_ 1783585771360354304
author Hepworth, Lauren
Rowe, Fiona
author_facet Hepworth, Lauren
Rowe, Fiona
author_sort Hepworth, Lauren
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Neurological conditions frequently cause visual field loss, commonly resulting in perimetry requests for suspected or known conditions. Currently there are no national guidelines for perimetry in neurological conditions. A wide choice of perimetry programs exists. An inappropriate program choice could fail to detect visual field loss. Two phases in this study determined preference of perimetry programs for detection of visual field loss in four common neurological conditions (idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH), optic neuropathies, chiasmal compression and stroke), to aid the design of research and clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: A survey consisted of 47 perimetry programs. Orthoptists and neuro-ophthalmologists were asked which perimetry programs they considered important for use in the four neurological conditions. These programs were short-listed for discussion in a consensus meeting. A nominal group technique was used for the consensus meeting to reach consensus on the three most favoured perimetry programs appropriate for the four conditions. RESULTS: Twenty-six participants completed the survey (51% return rate). Nine programs were found to be not applicable to any of the conditions. The short-lists for the conditions varied between six and ten perimetry programs. Seven participants discussed the survey results at a consensus meeting to agree the three most favoured perimetry programs for IIH, optic neuropathy and chiasmal compression (manual/semi manual kinetic, static 30–2 and full-field 120) and for stroke (manual/semi manual kinetic, static 30–2 and monocular Esterman). CONCLUSION: A wide range of perimetry programmes were explored thoroughly through survey and consensus methods in order to determine clinician preference for their use in neuro-ophthalmic practice. The three most favoured perimetry programs for the four conditions was established.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7510368
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher White Rose University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75103682020-09-29 Short-Listing the Program Choice for Perimetry in Neurological Conditions (PoPiN) Using Consensus Methods Hepworth, Lauren Rowe, Fiona Br Ir Orthopt J Research BACKGROUND: Neurological conditions frequently cause visual field loss, commonly resulting in perimetry requests for suspected or known conditions. Currently there are no national guidelines for perimetry in neurological conditions. A wide choice of perimetry programs exists. An inappropriate program choice could fail to detect visual field loss. Two phases in this study determined preference of perimetry programs for detection of visual field loss in four common neurological conditions (idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH), optic neuropathies, chiasmal compression and stroke), to aid the design of research and clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: A survey consisted of 47 perimetry programs. Orthoptists and neuro-ophthalmologists were asked which perimetry programs they considered important for use in the four neurological conditions. These programs were short-listed for discussion in a consensus meeting. A nominal group technique was used for the consensus meeting to reach consensus on the three most favoured perimetry programs appropriate for the four conditions. RESULTS: Twenty-six participants completed the survey (51% return rate). Nine programs were found to be not applicable to any of the conditions. The short-lists for the conditions varied between six and ten perimetry programs. Seven participants discussed the survey results at a consensus meeting to agree the three most favoured perimetry programs for IIH, optic neuropathy and chiasmal compression (manual/semi manual kinetic, static 30–2 and full-field 120) and for stroke (manual/semi manual kinetic, static 30–2 and monocular Esterman). CONCLUSION: A wide range of perimetry programmes were explored thoroughly through survey and consensus methods in order to determine clinician preference for their use in neuro-ophthalmic practice. The three most favoured perimetry programs for the four conditions was established. White Rose University Press 2019-11-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7510368/ /pubmed/32999983 http://dx.doi.org/10.22599/bioj.143 Text en Copyright: © 2019 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Research
Hepworth, Lauren
Rowe, Fiona
Short-Listing the Program Choice for Perimetry in Neurological Conditions (PoPiN) Using Consensus Methods
title Short-Listing the Program Choice for Perimetry in Neurological Conditions (PoPiN) Using Consensus Methods
title_full Short-Listing the Program Choice for Perimetry in Neurological Conditions (PoPiN) Using Consensus Methods
title_fullStr Short-Listing the Program Choice for Perimetry in Neurological Conditions (PoPiN) Using Consensus Methods
title_full_unstemmed Short-Listing the Program Choice for Perimetry in Neurological Conditions (PoPiN) Using Consensus Methods
title_short Short-Listing the Program Choice for Perimetry in Neurological Conditions (PoPiN) Using Consensus Methods
title_sort short-listing the program choice for perimetry in neurological conditions (popin) using consensus methods
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7510368/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32999983
http://dx.doi.org/10.22599/bioj.143
work_keys_str_mv AT hepworthlauren shortlistingtheprogramchoiceforperimetryinneurologicalconditionspopinusingconsensusmethods
AT rowefiona shortlistingtheprogramchoiceforperimetryinneurologicalconditionspopinusingconsensusmethods