Binocular Visual Field Test Research Articles

Comparison of the TEMPO binocular perimeter and Humphrey field analyzer

This study compared between TEMPO, a new binocular perimeter, with the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA). Patients were tested with both TEMPO 24–2 Ambient Interactive Zippy Estimated by Sequential Testing (AIZE)-Rapid and HFA 24–2 Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA)-Fast in a randomized sequence on the same day. Using a mixed-effects model, visual field (VF) parameters and reliability indices were compared. Retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness was measured using Cirrus optical coherence tomography (OCT), and coefficient of determinations for VF and OCT parameters were calculated and compared using Akaike information criteria. 740 eyes (including 68 healthy, 262 glaucoma suspects, and 410 glaucoma) of 370 participants were evaluated. No significant differences were seen in mean deviation and visual field index between the two perimeters (P > 0.05). A stronger association between VF mean sensitivity (dB or 1/L) and circumpapillary RNFL was found for TEMPO (adjusted R2 = 0.25; Akaike information criteria [AIC] = 5235.5 for dB, and adjusted R2 = 0.29; AIC = 5200.8 for 1/L, respectively) compared to HFA (adjusted R2 = 0.22; AIC = 5263.9 for dB, and adjusted R2 = 0.22; AIC = 5262.7 for 1/L, respectively). Measurement time was faster for TEMPO compared to HFA (261 s vs. 429 s, P < 0.001). Further investigations are needed to assess the long-term monitoring potential of this binocular VF test.

Binocular visual field in adults with horizontal strabismus and driving requirements

ObjectiveTo determine the horizontal extent of the binocular visual field (BVF) in subjects with horizontal strabismus and whether the BVF falls below the driving standard.Methods and analysisAdults with congenital esotropia and infantile exotropia ≤45 Prism Dioptres (PD), and subjects with orthotropia were recruited. The manifest angle of deviation was measured using a simultaneous prism cover test. Monocular Visual Field (MVF) and BVF were measured using the Esterman visual field test. Subjects with diplopia or a manifest angle of strabismus that varied by>8PD or the present of a vertical tropia >8PD were excluded.ResultsForty-nine subjects were included: 10 with orthotropia, 20 with exotropia and 19 with esotropia. The horizontal extent of BVF (degrees) was significantly smaller in esotropes (122.8 ± 18.8) than in orthotropes (141 ± 6.6) or exotropes (138.3 ± 8.3) (p < 0.01). In 6 (31.6%) subjects with an esotropia, the BVF was below the driving standard. The horizontal extent of the visual field (VF) of the amblyopic eyes of patients with esotropia (98.70 degrees, SD 19.76) and exotropia (104.75 degrees, SD16.93) were significantly smaller than those with orthotropia (121.00 degrees SD 3.16) by 22.3 degrees (p = 0.004) and 16.25 degrees (p = 0.045), respectively. The difference between the summation of MVFs and the BVF was significantly greater in orthotropes (100.6 ± 2.7) than in exotropes (68.9 ± 34.4) and esotropes (74.2 ± 20.7) (p < 0.01).ConclusionThe horizontal extent of BVF is significantly smaller and more variable in adults with congenital esotropia and may fall below the driving standard.Strengths and limitationsLargest study on visual fields in subjects with horizontal strabismus including an orthotropic control group who do not have diplopia and who would otherwise meet the driving standard.Visual field quality was high but limitation is that visual field repeatability was not undertaken.How this study might affect research, practice, or policyThe findings of this study would suggest that people with an esotropia should be offered the opportunity to have a binocular visual field test before applying for a driving license. The DVLA may want to consider requesting people with an esotropia to have a binocular visual field test as is a requirement with other ophthalmic conditions such as glaucoma.

Toward Improving the Mobility of Patients with Peripheral Visual Field Defects with Novel Digital Spectacles

To assess the efficacy of novel Digital spectacles (DSpecs) to improve mobility of patients with peripheral visual field (VF) loss. Prospective case series. Binocular VF defects were quantified with the DSpecs testing strategy. An algorithm was implemented that generated personalized visual augmentation profiles based on the measured VF. These profiles were achieved by relocating and resizing video signals to fit within the remaining VF in real time. Twenty patients with known binocular VF defects were tested using static test images, followed by dynamic walking simulations to determine if they could identify objects and avoid obstacles in an environment mimicking a real-life situation. The effect of the DSpecs were assessed for visual/hand coordination with object-grasping tests. Patients performed these tests with and without the DSpecs correction profile. The diagnostic binocular VF testing with the DSpecs was comparable to the integrated monocular standard automated perimetry based on point-by-point assessment with a mismatch error of 7.0%. Eighteen of 20 patients (90%) could identify peripheral objects in test images with the DSpecs that they could not previously. Visual/hand coordination was successful for 17 patients (85%) from the first trial. The object-grasping performance improved to 100% by the third trial. Patient performance, judged by finding and identifying objects in the periphery in a simulated walking environment, was significantly better with the DSpecs (P= 0.02, Wilcoxon rank sum test). DSpecs may improve mobility by facilitating the ability of patients to better identify moving peripheral hazardous objects.

Clinical Efficacy of Pinhole Soft Contact Lenses for the Correction of Presbyopia

ABSTRACTWe investigated the clinical efficacy of pinhole soft contact lenses for presbyopia correction. Twenty participants with presbyopia wore pinhole soft contact lenses in the non-dominant eye for 2 weeks. Manifest refraction, Goldmann binocular visual field tests, contrast sensitivity tests, and biomicroscopic examinations were performed along with evaluations of questionnaire responses and the binocular corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA), distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA), and depth of focus, both before and after 2 weeks of lens wear. DCNVA at 33 and 40 cm and DCIVA at 50 and 70 cm showed significant improvements after pinhole lens wear (P-value: <0.001, <0.001, <0.001, and 0.046, respectively), with no changes in the binocular visual field and binocular CDVA. Contrast sensitivities under photopic and mesopic conditions decreased at some frequencies; however, visual function questionnaire scores significantly improved (all P-values <0.001). These findings suggest that pinhole contact lenses effectively correct presbyopia.

Correlation Between Visual Function and Performance of Simulated Daily Living Activities in Glaucomatous Patients.

To analyze the correlations between functional clinical tests and the performance of glaucoma patients in simulated daily living activities. Thirty-two patients with chronic glaucoma, followed at the Quinze-Vingts National Ophthalmology Hospital, were included. All patients had a clinical evaluation of visual function including best-corrected visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and monocular and binocular visual field (VF) tests. Four different simulated activities of daily living were evaluated in standardized artificial platforms (StreetLab and HomeLab): "mobility" and an obstacle avoidance task in an artificial street, "reaching and grasping" large and small objects on a kitchen work surface, "localization of people" and "face orientation recognition." Patient performance in the different tasks was correlated with VF evaluation including integrated binocular visual field (IVF), VF mean deviation (MD) of the better and the worse eye, Esterman binocular VF, best-corrected visual acuity, and contrast sensitivity. The IVF score was significantly correlated with "localization of people" time (r=0.49; P=0.003), "face orientation recognition" time (r=0.50; P=0.002), and "movement onset" for reaching and grasping small objects (r=0.38; P=0.029). The MD of the better eye appeared significantly correlated with "face orientation recognition" time (r=-0.44; P=0.009) and "localization of people" time (r=-0.46; P=0.005). The Esterman score appeared significantly correlated with "mobility time" (r=-0.40; P=0.018), "localization of people" (r=-0.37; P=0.030), "face orientation recognition" times (r=-0.39; P=0.024), and "movement onset" for reaching and grasping large objects (r=-0.43; P=0.015). The IVF score and the MD of the better eye appeared to better evaluate "reaching and grasping," "face orientation recognition," and "localization of people" simulated tasks, whereas for the "mobility" task, the Esterman VF seemed more useful. The precise evaluation of the glaucoma patient's ability to perform everyday life tasks is complex and may require both monocular and binocular VF tests.

Functional visual fields: a cross-sectional UK study to determine which visual field paradigms best reflect difficulty with mobility function

ObjectivesTo develop an appropriate method of assessing visual field (VF) loss which reflects its functional consequences, this study aims to determine which method(s) of assessing VF best reflect mobility difficulty.SettingThis...

Clinical applications of a visual field perimeter with binocular video imaging

PurposeThe majority of visual field testing equipment is designed for monocular tests only: most instruments do not have the capability to visualize both eyes simultaneously and many do not have a head rest position suitable for binocular testing. This presentation will focus on the clinical applications of the binocular visual field tests available on the MonCvONE perimeter.MethodsBinocular testing is very important for functional evaluations. Extrapolation from monocular tests is inaccurate as phenomenons such as integration, suppression, ocular deviation, cyclotorsion, … affect differently monocular and binocular vision. The MonCvONE perimeter combines a binocular video sensor with the possibility of video recording to the possibility of controlling the exam with an interactive mode similar to the Goldmann perimeter.ResultsClinical examples of binocular perimetry will be presented including ‐ the evaluation of ptosis with a documentation of the gain in visual field area in relationship with the opening of the eye lids. ‐ the assessment of low vision with the Esterman technique ‐ the evaluation of drivers’ visual field in agreement with the European Community directive ‐ the evaluation of the field of single vision with the determination of a diplopia score‐ the test of the visual field in young infants when eye occlusion and head immobility are not easily obtainedConclusionsThese examples demonstrate the clinical usefulness of binocular visual field testing with video recording

Binocular Measures of Visual Acuity and Visual Field versus Binocular Approximations

To assess the relationship of binocular visual function tests with binocular approximations using data from the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study (CIGTS). Case series based on existing data from a clinical trial. Six hundred seven patients with newly diagnosed open-angle glaucoma from the CIGTS. Monocular visual field (VF) and visual acuity (VA) tests were performed at baseline and every 6 months thereafter. Binocular tests of visual function (Esterman VF score, binocular VA) were added to the CIGTS protocol 3 years into the study. The binocular approximations of binocular visual function were better or worse eye, average eye, better or worse location, and binocular summation or pointwise binocular summation. Associations between binocular tests and binocular approximations to represent binocular visual function were assessed with Pearson's correlations (r), as was the relationship between vision-related quality of life (VR QOL; Visual Activities Questionnaire [VAQ] and the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire [NEIVFQ-25]) and binocular tests or binocular approximations of visual function. Binocular visual function (VF and VA) and VR QOL. Five hundred seventy-five patients underwent at least 1 binocular visual function test. The Esterman score was correlated significantly with all binocular approximations of VF, with r values ranging from 0.31 (worse-eye mean deviation [MD]) to 0.42 (better-eye MD; P < 0.0001 for all). Binocular VA showed stronger correlations with binocular approximations, with r values ranging from 0.65 (worse-eye VA) to 0.80 (binocular summation; P<0.0001 for all). Correlations between the VAQ and Esterman score were stronger in 7 of 9 subscales (r=-0.14 to-0.25; P < 0.05 for all) than correlations with all 7 binocular approximations. In contrast, correlations between the VAQ and binocular VA (r=-0.07 to-0.21) were weaker in all subscales than those with better-eye, average-eye, and binocular summation of VA (r=-0.12 to-0.25), but not different from worse-eye values. These trends also were found in relevant subscales of the NEI VFQ-25. We found limited benefit in binocular testing of VA in the clinical setting as a means of approximating a patient's reported visual functioning. In contrast, we found some benefit in performing binocularVF testing, because the results correlated more closely with reported functioning than binocular approximations.

Usefulness of Binocular Visual Field Test in Patient with Unilateral Functional Temporal Hemianopia

Usefulness of Binocular Visual Field Test in Patient with Unilateral Functional Temporal Hemianopia

The evaluation of binocular visual field and clinical application of glaucoma

Visual field is an important means of the assessment of visual function. In our daily life, the actual visual function is consist of both eyes. Therefore, the binocular visual field test is significant to understand the real visual function. Currently, the binocular vision assessment methods included Esterman visual test and Integrated visual fields. The IVF includes: binocular summation, best location, best eye and average eye. In this review, the significance of binocular visual field inspection, binocular visual field integration methods and its practical application in daily life and clinical glaucoma research work are summarized. We hope that it can do some favors to clinical and scientific researches of assessment and application of binocular visual field. (Chin J Ophthalmol, 2016, 52: 872-875).

Effect of different lightning conditions on daily living activities of glaucoma patients

PurposeTo determine the impact of different lightning conditions on glaucoma patient's ability to perform activities of daily living.MethodsTwenty‐three glaucoma patients and 8 age‐matched control subjects were included. All glaucoma patients had a best corrected visual acuity &gt;20/30. Best corrected visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, monocular automated Humphrey 24‐2 visual field test, and binocular visual field test were obtained from all subjects. Two tasks of daily living were evaluated: (i) Mobility performance was assessed in an artificial street (StreetLab®) by the time required to complete an established travel path (TP) and the number of mobility incidents (MI); (ii) Reaching‐and‐Grasping performance was evaluated on a kitchen worktop in the HomeLab®. The movement onset time (MO) and the overall movement time (OM) for reaching‐and‐grasping the object were recorded. Trials were carried out with three lighting conditions: scotopic 2 lux, photopic 250 lux and photopic 1,500 lux.ResultsGlaucoma patients completed the travel path 8.8% more slowly than controls (p = 0.013). Under high luminosity, all participants completed the path 3.7% and 2.7% more quickly than under low and intermediate luminosity respectively (p &lt; 0.01). The influence of light condition was not different between the glaucoma and control group (p = 0.16). The number of MI was not different between both groups (p = 0.65). There was no difference in average MO time between the two groups (p = 0.086) but glaucoma patients had a significantly longer OM time as compared to control subjects (p &lt; 0.01). Low light condition increased the MO time for all subjects without difference between the two groups.ConclusionsGlaucoma patients had decreased performance in mobility and motor control tasks. The influence of light condition was not different between the glaucoma and control group.

The Effect of Multispot Laser Panretinal Photocoagulation on Retinal Sensitivity and Driving Eligibility in Patients With Diabetic Retinopathy.

Panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) may lead to peripheral field loss that prevents driving. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents are proposed as treatments for PDR that spare peripheral vision. If multispot lasers cause less visual field loss, continuing to perform PRP may be justified. To assess the effect of bilateral multispot laser PRP on retinal sensitivity and driving visual fields in PDR. This prospective nonrandomized interventional cohort analysis performed at a tertiary referral center included 43 laser-naive patients with PDR that required bilateral PRP. Participants were recruited from June 27, 2012, to October 14, 2013. At baseline and 6-month follow-up, patients underwent detailed static and kinetic perimetry, microperimetry, optical coherence tomography, wide-field color fundus photography, and fluorescein angiography. Quantitative change in retinal sensitivity was assessed by comparing the mean global retinal sensitivity before and after laser treatment and by comparing the modeled hill of vision by deriving a volumetric measure. Final follow-up was completed on May 21, 2014. Multispot laser treatment was applied using standard parameters, until neovascularization regressed or complete retinal coverage was achieved. Participants who passed the Esterman binocular visual field test for driving in the United Kingdom (at least 120° horizontal field with no significant defects within the central 20°) and full-field and macular retinal sensitivity. Of the 43 patients (17 men; 26 women; mean [SD] age, 46.6 [13.3] years), 38 (88%) completed the study. Before treatment, 41 of 43 patients (95%) passed the Esterman visual field test for driving; after completion of laser treatment, 35 of 38 patients (92%) passed. The mean (SD) change in retinal sensitivity on static perimetry was -1.4 (3.7) (95% CI, -2.7 to -0.1) dB OD and -2.4 (2.9) (95% CI, -3.4 to -1.4) dB OS. Mean (SD) 4° macular sensitivity decreased by 3.0 (5.2) dB OD and 2.6 (5.4) dB OS. This prospective study investigating the effects of multispot laser PRP on retinal sensitivity demonstrates a high likelihood of retaining eligibility to drive based on adequate visual field. A mild loss of retinal sensitivity was detected at 6 months after completion of laser treatment. Further change to visual fields may have occurred with longer follow-up. This study provides information that might be used to counsel patients requiring PRP and informs the debate regarding the role of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy in patients with PDR who might otherwise receive laser treatment.

The Correlation Between Glaucomatous Visual Field Loss and Vision-Related Quality of Life

To evaluate the vision-related quality of life (QoL) of glaucoma patients in terms of the correlation between visual field (VF) loss and National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire-39 (NEI VFQ-39) survey. A total of 244 glaucoma patients were examined with monocular Humphrey 24-2 central full threshold and Esterman binocular VF tests. Patients were grouped according to their monocular VFs done by Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS) classification and Esterman binocular VF efficiency scores. NEI VFQ-39 was applied for the evaluation of vision-related QoL. NEI VFQ-39 subscales and total scores were evaluated and the highest mean average values were in "color vision" (92.00±16.59) and "social functioning" (90.74±15.98). The lowest mean average values were in "general health" (54.76±18.86) and "general vision" (66.03±17.59). All the subscales except "general health" and "ocular pain" showed positive correlations with the monocular and Esterman binocular VF groupings. Pearson correlation analysis between NEI VFQ-39 subscales and the AGIS VF classification-based groups indicated that the subscales had statistically significant negative correlations except the "general health" (r=-0.151, P=0.018) and "ocular pain" (r=-0.048, P=0.455). The highest correlation with AGIS VF classification was in "driving" (r=-0.477, P=0.001) and "general vision" (r=-0.446, P=0.000) subscales. There was statistically significant correlation between NEI VFQ-39 subscales and Esterman binocular VF groups except "general health" (r=-0.064, P=0.318) and "ocular pain" (r=-0.062, P=0.337). The highest negative correlation was in "distant activities" (r=-0.522, P=0.000) and the lowest negative correlation was in "color vision" (r=-0.416, P=0.000) subscales. The highest correlation between binocular distant and binocular near-visual acuities was in "distant activities" and the lowest correlation was in "role difficulties" subscales. There is statistically significant correlation between the glaucoma patients' VF loss and the vision-related QoL. The evaluation of self-reported vision status in glaucoma patients may be a guide for the rehabilitation of their disabilities in vision-related daily activities.

Comparison of the monocular Humphrey visual field and the binocular Humphrey esterman visual field test for driver licensing in glaucoma subjects in Sweden

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to compare the monocular Humphrey Visual Field (HVF) with the binocular Humphrey Esterman Visual Field (HEVF) for determining whether subjects suffering from glaucoma fulfilled the new medical requirements for possession of a Swedish driver’s license.MethodsHVF SITA Fast 24–2 full threshold (monocularly) and HEVF (binocularly) were performed consecutively on the same day on 40 subjects with glaucomatous damage of varying degrees in both eyes. Assessment of results was constituted as either “pass” or “fail”, according to the new medical requirements put into effect September 1, 2010 by the Swedish Transport Agency.ResultsForty subjects were recruited and participated in the study. Sixteen subjects passed both tests, and sixteen subjects failed both tests. Eight subjects passed the HEFV but failed the HVF. There was a significant difference between HEVF and HVF (χ2, p = 0.004). There were no subjects who passed the HVF, but failed the HEVF.ConclusionsThe monocular visual field test (HVF) gave more specific information about the location and depth of the defects, and therefore is the overwhelming method of choice for use in diagnostics. The binocular visual field test (HEVF) seems not be as efficient as the HVF in finding visual field defects in glaucoma subjects, and is therefore doubtful in evaluating visual capabilities in traffic situations.

Visual Field Staging Systems in Glaucoma and the Activities of Daily Living

To compare 8 clinically relevant methods of staging visual field (VF) damage in glaucoma with a performance-based measure of the activities of daily living and self-reported quality of life. Prospective cross-sectional study. One hundred ninety-two patients with various types of glaucoma were evaluated at the Wills Eye Institute using standard monocular and binocular VF testing, as well as an objective, performance-based measure of visual function (the Assessment of Disability Related to Vision), and a subjective, standardized measure of quality of life (the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire). Binocular VFs were scored according to the Esterman and Integrated VF Systems. Monocular VFs were scored according to the mean defect, pattern standard deviation, Hodapp-Parrish-Anderson method, glaucoma staging system, glaucoma staging system 2, and the field damage likelihood scale. Partial Spearman correlations between VF staging systems, Assessment of Disability Related to Vision scores, and 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire scores were calculated. Assessment of Disability Related to Vision scores and 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire scores were associated most closely with the VF score in the better eye and the binocular VF scoring systems. The amount of binocular VF loss and the status of the better eye most accurately predict functional ability and quality of life in glaucoma.

Importance of Visual Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity in Patients With Glaucoma

To determine which aspects of vision most influence the ability of patients with glaucoma to function. A total of 192 patients with a full range of glaucomatous visual loss were selected from the Glaucoma Service of Wills Eye Institute. Patients were evaluated clinically with standard visual assessments: visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, visual field, stereopsis, the Disc Damage Likelihood Scale, and intraocular pressure. Patients were evaluated objectively using a comprehensive performance-based measure of visual function, the Assessment of Disability Related to Vision (ADREV), and subjectively with the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. Statistical analyses, including Spearman correlation coefficients and regression analysis, were performed on the data. Performance on the ADREV was most strongly associated with binocular visual acuity (r = -0.79; P < .001) and binocular contrast sensitivity (r = 0.80; P < .001). Monocular and binocular visual field test results correlated well with the ability to perform the ADREV tasks, but there was a significantly weaker association (P < .05) compared with visual acuity and contrast sensitivity. The aspects of visual function that best predict the ability of a patient with glaucoma to perform activities of daily living are binocular visual acuity and contrast sensitivity.

Esterman Binocular Scoring in Amblyopia

The Esterman binocular visual field test was performed on 24 amblyopic subjects and 10 normal subjects. No correlation was found between the evaluated clinical parameters and Esterman scores in the patients with amblyopia. The Esterman score may not properly reflect the actual binocular disability in amblyopia.

Associations between glaucomatous visual field loss and participation in activities of daily living.

This study investigated the association between visual field loss and participation in daily activities in individuals with glaucoma. Seventy-nine patients were recruited from the Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. Visual fields were assessed using the Esterman binocular visual field tests and participation in daily activities was assessed using the Impact of Vision Impairment (IVI) questionnaire. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity were also measured. There was no independent relationship between visual field loss and IVI score (r = -0.20; P = 0.09), except for the mobility domain (r = 0.25; P = 0.03). Mobility was the most affected domain of the IVI (mean = 1.2). Over a quarter of the patients reported experiencing moderate to severe restriction with mobility activities despite relatively minor binocular field loss. Mobility is the area in which glaucoma patients encounter difficulties even when the visual field and visual acuity are relatively good. Questions related to mobility could be asked to identify those patients who need rehabilitation.

Quality of life in glaucoma and its relationship with visual function.

The aims of this study were (a) to explore patients self-reported visual disability resulting from glaucoma by means of a questionnaire developed for this purpose; (b) identify activities strongly associated with a measure of visual field loss, (c) to quantify different psychophysical aspects of visual function; (d) to assess the relationship between objective measures of visual function and patients' perception of their vision-related quality of life. Three groups of glaucoma patients (n = 47) with mild (n = 18), moderate (n = 19), and severe visual field loss (n = 10) and a group of normal controls (n = 19) underwent a comprehensive clinical examination, completed a questionnaire and, on a separate visit, performed a number of psychophysical tests of visual function. Questionnaire responses (vision-related quality of life, general health and psychosocial variables), visual acuity, visual fields, Esterman binocular disability scores, contrast sensitivity, critical flicker frequency, color vision, dark adaptation, glare disability (brightness acuity), and stereoacuity scores were measured. Fifteen of the 50 questions were noted to have a strong significant relationship with a measure of visual field loss and were included in a new questionnaire scale, the Glaucoma Quality of Life - 15 (GQL-15). The scale validity showed a significant correlation with perimetric mean deviation (MD) values (r = -0.6; P < 0.0001), the reliability of the scale was high (Cronbach alpha = 0.95), and test-retest reliability of the questionnaire was strong (r = 0.87). An overall statistically significant decrease in performance-related quality of life was noted between normal subjects and all groups of glaucoma patients. A significant relationship was found between the scale questionnaire summary performance measure and a number of psychophysical tests: Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity (r = -0.45, P < 0.001), glare disability (r = -0.41, P < 0.001), Esterman binocular visual field test (r = -0.39, P < 0.001), dark adaptation (r = 0.34, P = 0.007), and stereopsis (r = 0.26, P = 0.04). Perceived visual disability relating to certain tasks (particularly involving dark adaptation and disability glare, activities demanding functional peripheral vision such us tripping over and bumping into objects and outdoor mobility tasks) was significantly associated with the severity of binocular visual field loss. As a result, a new glaucoma-specific questionnaire scale with good performance characteristics is presented in this study. The difficulties encountered by patients in everyday life (as measured with the questionnaire) were also mirrored in their performance on a number of psychophysical tests, especially contrast sensitivity, glare disability, Esterman binocular visual field test, and dark adaptation.

Loss of stereopsis with optic chiasmal lesions and stereoscopic tests as a differential test

Objective To identify and characterize the loss of stereopsis observed in patients with lesions of the optic chiasm. Study design Cross-sectional study. Participants Forty-three patients who had good visual acuity with orthophoria and without strabismologic histories were divided into two groups. Group 1 consisted of 13 patients with lesions involving the optic chiasm (regardless of their visual field loss) diagnosed by magnetic resonance imaging findings. Group 2 (control group) consisted of 30 patients who had large absolute visual field defects as a result of other causes, including 11 intracranial disorders other than optic chiasmal lesions, 11 cases of open-angle glaucoma, and 8 patients with lesions of the retina. Methods The stereoacuity and visual field in each case in group 1 (before and after surgery) and group 2 were assessed, and the results were compared. Main outcome measures Stereoacuity was assessed by the Titmus stereo test (normal value for circle, 6/9; 80 seconds of arc) and by Lang-stereotest (normal value for circle, 3/3; 350 seconds of arc). Visual field was evaluated by Goldmann and Humphrey perimetry (conventional perimetry), the starlight test (binocular visual field test), and scanning laser ophthalmoscopic microperimetry (microperimetry). Results Before surgery, 11 of 13 cases (85%) in group 1 failed stereo tests, and after surgery, 5 of 13 cases (38%) in group 1 failed stereo tests. Before surgery, four patients who failed stereo tests showed no absolute scotoma by Humphrey or Goldmann analysis; after surgery, one patient who failed stereo tests showed no absolute scotoma by Humphrey or Goldmann analysis. However, starlight testing showed complete bitemporal hemianopsia only under binocular conditions, and microperimetry demonstrated a relative bitemporal hemianopsia at the fixating point. No patient failed in the Titmus circle test, but one patient in group 2 failed the Lang test (3%). The patients with chiasmal lesions significantly lost the ability of stereopsis compared with other diseases (group 1 [before or after surgery] vs. group 2, P < 0.001, Fisher’s exact test). Conventional perimetry was unable to measure scotomas within 3° of the fixation point, which is the key area for acute foveal stereopsis, because of an attached observational mirror. Conclusions The difficulty with stereopsis in patients with lesions of the optic chiasm is most likely caused by the compression of the decussating optic nerve fibers resulting in the loss of an overlapping visual field at the fixation point. Stereo tests were demonstrated to be simple and effective adjunctive tests for suspected chiasmal compression.