Visual field examination using a video projector: comparison with Humphrey perimeter
Authors Brouzas D, Tsapakis S, Nitoda E, Moschos M
Received 14 September 2013
Accepted for publication 1 November 2013
Published 11 March 2014 Volume 2014:8 Pages 523—528
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single anonymous peer review
Peer reviewer comments 3
Dimitrios Brouzas, Stylianos Tsapakis, Eirini Nitoda, Marilita M Moschos
First Department of Ophthalmology, Medical School, University of Athens, Greece
Purpose: To present a method of visual field examination using a video projector. Also, we compare our results with those of a Humphrey perimeter, which is accepted as standard in automated perimetry.
Materials and methods: Software implementing a full-threshold 4-2-step staircase algorithm for the central 30-2 of the visual field (76 points) has been developed and tested in nine eyes of seven patients using an Epson TW 700 video projector. The results were compared to those obtained from the same patients using the Humphrey perimeter.
Results: High correlation between the video projector visual fields and those of the Humphrey perimeter was found. The point-to-point correlation coefficient ranged from 0.75 to 0.90, with P<0.0001 for each eye.
Conclusion: Visual field examination results using a video projector have high correlation with those of a Humphrey perimeter. The method is possibly suitable for clinical use.
Keywords: visual fields, video projector, computerized perimetry, automated perimetry, visual field software
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]