Comparison of the TEMPO Binocular Perimeter and Humphrey Field Analyzer

AI Generated Summary*

A new binocular perimeter, TEMPO, running 24-2 AIZE-Rapid, was compared with Humphrey Field Analyzer 24-2 SITA-Fast in 740 eyes of 370 participants (68 healthy, 262 glaucoma suspects, 410 glaucoma), tested in random order on one day. Mean deviation and visual field index matched closely, while TEMPO gave higher pattern standard deviation (4.7 against 4.1 dB) and lower foveal threshold (30.8 against 33.3 dB). Its reliability indices were lower too, although the devices derive them differently. Mean sensitivity tracked circumpapillary nerve fiber layer thickness somewhat better with TEMPO (adjusted R2 0.25 to 0.29 versus 0.22 for HFA). Examination time fell from 429 to 261 seconds, and 73% of patients favored it; longitudinal performance remains unproven.

*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.