Comparison of Humphrey Field Analyzer and imo visual field test results in patients with glaucoma and pseudo-fixation loss

AI Generated Summary*

Fifty-four eyes of 54 glaucoma patients with pseudo-fixation loss (fixation loss of 20% or more on the Humphrey Field Analyzer despite steady gaze) underwent HFA 24-2 or 30-2 SITA-Standard testing, then the imo head-mounted perimeter, which tracks eye position and repositions stimuli. Mean deviation, pattern standard deviation and visual field index did not differ significantly between devices and correlated strongly (r 0.96 to 0.98). Mean fixation loss dropped from 27.5% to 13.2% with imo (p<0.01); average false positive and false negative rates did not differ, though agreement across reliability indices was poor. Pointwise sensitivity ran about 1.7 dB higher on the HFA, possibly from fatigue or learning; false positives were suggested as one contributor to high fixation loss.

*This summary was generated by AI and is published unedited. Oku does not alter these summaries. It may contain errors or omissions and is provided for general informational purposes only. Oku does not guarantee its accuracy, completeness, or reliability. For authoritative information, please refer to the original, peer-reviewed article.