Cargando…

A Comparative Study between Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Faster and Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Standard in Glaucoma Patients

PURPOSE: To compare the results of the new strategy Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA) Faster to the results of SITA Standard in patients with glaucoma. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of 49 patients with glaucoma and previous experience with standard automated perimetry. Tw...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mendieta, Núria, Suárez, Joel, Blasco, Cristina, Muñiz, Romina, Pueyo, Carmen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8579789/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34765810
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/joco.joco_148_20
_version_ 1784596495941500928
author Mendieta, Núria
Suárez, Joel
Blasco, Cristina
Muñiz, Romina
Pueyo, Carmen
author_facet Mendieta, Núria
Suárez, Joel
Blasco, Cristina
Muñiz, Romina
Pueyo, Carmen
author_sort Mendieta, Núria
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare the results of the new strategy Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA) Faster to the results of SITA Standard in patients with glaucoma. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of 49 patients with glaucoma and previous experience with standard automated perimetry. Two consecutive tests were performed in random order, one with SITA Standard and another one with SITA Faster, in the studied eye of each patient. Comparisons were made for test time, mean deviation (MD), visual field index (VFI), and number of depressed points in pattern deviation map and total deviation map for every level of significance. RESULTS: The average test time was 56% shorter with SITA Faster (P < 0.001). The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for MD and VFI showed excellent agreement between both strategies, ICC = 0.98 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96, 0.99) and ICC = 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95, 0.99), respectively. For the number of depressed points in total deviation map and pattern deviation map, ICC demonstrated good agreement with values between 0.8 and 0.95. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that SITA Faster is a shorter test with strong agreement with SITA Standard parameters. These results suggest that SITA Faster could replace SITA Standard for glaucoma diagnosis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8579789
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85797892021-11-10 A Comparative Study between Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Faster and Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Standard in Glaucoma Patients Mendieta, Núria Suárez, Joel Blasco, Cristina Muñiz, Romina Pueyo, Carmen J Curr Ophthalmol Original Article PURPOSE: To compare the results of the new strategy Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA) Faster to the results of SITA Standard in patients with glaucoma. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of 49 patients with glaucoma and previous experience with standard automated perimetry. Two consecutive tests were performed in random order, one with SITA Standard and another one with SITA Faster, in the studied eye of each patient. Comparisons were made for test time, mean deviation (MD), visual field index (VFI), and number of depressed points in pattern deviation map and total deviation map for every level of significance. RESULTS: The average test time was 56% shorter with SITA Faster (P < 0.001). The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for MD and VFI showed excellent agreement between both strategies, ICC = 0.98 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96, 0.99) and ICC = 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95, 0.99), respectively. For the number of depressed points in total deviation map and pattern deviation map, ICC demonstrated good agreement with values between 0.8 and 0.95. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that SITA Faster is a shorter test with strong agreement with SITA Standard parameters. These results suggest that SITA Faster could replace SITA Standard for glaucoma diagnosis. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021-10-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8579789/ /pubmed/34765810 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/joco.joco_148_20 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Journal of Current Ophthalmology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Mendieta, Núria
Suárez, Joel
Blasco, Cristina
Muñiz, Romina
Pueyo, Carmen
A Comparative Study between Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Faster and Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Standard in Glaucoma Patients
title A Comparative Study between Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Faster and Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Standard in Glaucoma Patients
title_full A Comparative Study between Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Faster and Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Standard in Glaucoma Patients
title_fullStr A Comparative Study between Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Faster and Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Standard in Glaucoma Patients
title_full_unstemmed A Comparative Study between Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Faster and Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Standard in Glaucoma Patients
title_short A Comparative Study between Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Faster and Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Standard in Glaucoma Patients
title_sort comparative study between swedish interactive thresholding algorithm faster and swedish interactive thresholding algorithm standard in glaucoma patients
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8579789/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34765810
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/joco.joco_148_20
work_keys_str_mv AT mendietanuria acomparativestudybetweenswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmfasterandswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmstandardinglaucomapatients
AT suarezjoel acomparativestudybetweenswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmfasterandswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmstandardinglaucomapatients
AT blascocristina acomparativestudybetweenswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmfasterandswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmstandardinglaucomapatients
AT munizromina acomparativestudybetweenswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmfasterandswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmstandardinglaucomapatients
AT pueyocarmen acomparativestudybetweenswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmfasterandswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmstandardinglaucomapatients
AT mendietanuria comparativestudybetweenswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmfasterandswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmstandardinglaucomapatients
AT suarezjoel comparativestudybetweenswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmfasterandswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmstandardinglaucomapatients
AT blascocristina comparativestudybetweenswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmfasterandswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmstandardinglaucomapatients
AT munizromina comparativestudybetweenswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmfasterandswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmstandardinglaucomapatients
AT pueyocarmen comparativestudybetweenswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmfasterandswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithmstandardinglaucomapatients