Cargando…

Comparing the usefulness of a new algorithm to measure visual field using the variational Bayes linear regression in glaucoma patients, in comparison to the Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm

BACKGROUND/AIMS: We previously reported that the visual field (VF) prediction model using the variational Bayes linear regression (VBLR) is useful for accurately predicting VF progression in glaucoma (Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014, 2018). We constructed a VF measurement algorithm using VBLR, and t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Murata, Hiroshi, Asaoka, Ryo, Fujino, Yuri, Matsuura, Masato, Hirasawa, Kazunori, Shimada, Satoshi, Shoji, Nobuyuki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9046736/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33441321
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2020-318304
_version_ 1784695575732551680
author Murata, Hiroshi
Asaoka, Ryo
Fujino, Yuri
Matsuura, Masato
Hirasawa, Kazunori
Shimada, Satoshi
Shoji, Nobuyuki
author_facet Murata, Hiroshi
Asaoka, Ryo
Fujino, Yuri
Matsuura, Masato
Hirasawa, Kazunori
Shimada, Satoshi
Shoji, Nobuyuki
author_sort Murata, Hiroshi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND/AIMS: We previously reported that the visual field (VF) prediction model using the variational Bayes linear regression (VBLR) is useful for accurately predicting VF progression in glaucoma (Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014, 2018). We constructed a VF measurement algorithm using VBLR, and the purpose of this study was to investigate its usefulness. METHOD: 122 eyes of 73 patients with open-angle glaucoma were included in the current study. VF measurement was performed using the currently proposed VBLR programme with AP-7700 perimetry (KOWA). VF measurements were also conducted using the Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm (SITA) standard programme with Humphrey field analyser. VF measurements were performed using the 24–2 test grid. Visual sensitivities, test–retest reproducibility and measurement duration were compared between the two algorithms. RESULT: Mean mean deviation (MD) values with SITA standard were −7.9 and −8.7 dB (first and second measurements), whereas those with VBLR-VF were −8.2 and −8.0 dB, respectively. There were no significant differences across these values. The correlation coefficient of MD values between the 2 algorithms was 0.97 or 0.98. Test–retest reproducibility did not differ between the two algorithms. Mean measurement duration with SITA standard was 6 min and 02 s or 6 min and 00 s (first or second measurement), whereas a significantly shorter duration was associated with VBLR-VF (5 min and 23 s or 5 min and 30 s). CONCLUSION: VBLR-VF reduced test duration while maintaining the same accuracy as the SITA-standard.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9046736
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90467362022-05-11 Comparing the usefulness of a new algorithm to measure visual field using the variational Bayes linear regression in glaucoma patients, in comparison to the Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm Murata, Hiroshi Asaoka, Ryo Fujino, Yuri Matsuura, Masato Hirasawa, Kazunori Shimada, Satoshi Shoji, Nobuyuki Br J Ophthalmol Clinical Science BACKGROUND/AIMS: We previously reported that the visual field (VF) prediction model using the variational Bayes linear regression (VBLR) is useful for accurately predicting VF progression in glaucoma (Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014, 2018). We constructed a VF measurement algorithm using VBLR, and the purpose of this study was to investigate its usefulness. METHOD: 122 eyes of 73 patients with open-angle glaucoma were included in the current study. VF measurement was performed using the currently proposed VBLR programme with AP-7700 perimetry (KOWA). VF measurements were also conducted using the Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm (SITA) standard programme with Humphrey field analyser. VF measurements were performed using the 24–2 test grid. Visual sensitivities, test–retest reproducibility and measurement duration were compared between the two algorithms. RESULT: Mean mean deviation (MD) values with SITA standard were −7.9 and −8.7 dB (first and second measurements), whereas those with VBLR-VF were −8.2 and −8.0 dB, respectively. There were no significant differences across these values. The correlation coefficient of MD values between the 2 algorithms was 0.97 or 0.98. Test–retest reproducibility did not differ between the two algorithms. Mean measurement duration with SITA standard was 6 min and 02 s or 6 min and 00 s (first or second measurement), whereas a significantly shorter duration was associated with VBLR-VF (5 min and 23 s or 5 min and 30 s). CONCLUSION: VBLR-VF reduced test duration while maintaining the same accuracy as the SITA-standard. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-05 2021-01-13 /pmc/articles/PMC9046736/ /pubmed/33441321 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2020-318304 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Clinical Science
Murata, Hiroshi
Asaoka, Ryo
Fujino, Yuri
Matsuura, Masato
Hirasawa, Kazunori
Shimada, Satoshi
Shoji, Nobuyuki
Comparing the usefulness of a new algorithm to measure visual field using the variational Bayes linear regression in glaucoma patients, in comparison to the Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm
title Comparing the usefulness of a new algorithm to measure visual field using the variational Bayes linear regression in glaucoma patients, in comparison to the Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm
title_full Comparing the usefulness of a new algorithm to measure visual field using the variational Bayes linear regression in glaucoma patients, in comparison to the Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm
title_fullStr Comparing the usefulness of a new algorithm to measure visual field using the variational Bayes linear regression in glaucoma patients, in comparison to the Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm
title_full_unstemmed Comparing the usefulness of a new algorithm to measure visual field using the variational Bayes linear regression in glaucoma patients, in comparison to the Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm
title_short Comparing the usefulness of a new algorithm to measure visual field using the variational Bayes linear regression in glaucoma patients, in comparison to the Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm
title_sort comparing the usefulness of a new algorithm to measure visual field using the variational bayes linear regression in glaucoma patients, in comparison to the swedish interactive thresholding algorithm
topic Clinical Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9046736/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33441321
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2020-318304
work_keys_str_mv AT muratahiroshi comparingtheusefulnessofanewalgorithmtomeasurevisualfieldusingthevariationalbayeslinearregressioninglaucomapatientsincomparisontotheswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithm
AT asaokaryo comparingtheusefulnessofanewalgorithmtomeasurevisualfieldusingthevariationalbayeslinearregressioninglaucomapatientsincomparisontotheswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithm
AT fujinoyuri comparingtheusefulnessofanewalgorithmtomeasurevisualfieldusingthevariationalbayeslinearregressioninglaucomapatientsincomparisontotheswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithm
AT matsuuramasato comparingtheusefulnessofanewalgorithmtomeasurevisualfieldusingthevariationalbayeslinearregressioninglaucomapatientsincomparisontotheswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithm
AT hirasawakazunori comparingtheusefulnessofanewalgorithmtomeasurevisualfieldusingthevariationalbayeslinearregressioninglaucomapatientsincomparisontotheswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithm
AT shimadasatoshi comparingtheusefulnessofanewalgorithmtomeasurevisualfieldusingthevariationalbayeslinearregressioninglaucomapatientsincomparisontotheswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithm
AT shojinobuyuki comparingtheusefulnessofanewalgorithmtomeasurevisualfieldusingthevariationalbayeslinearregressioninglaucomapatientsincomparisontotheswedishinteractivethresholdingalgorithm