期刊文献+
共找到2篇文章
< 1 >
每页显示 20 50 100
对采用Humphrey Matrix 24-2阈值方案的倍频技术视野检查法的临床评价
1
作者 spry p.g.d. Hussin H.M. +1 位作者 Sparrow J.M. 韩静 《世界核心医学期刊文摘(眼科学分册)》 2005年第11期31-32,共2页
Aims: To evaluate performance of frequency doubling technology (FDT) perimetry using the Humphrey Matrix 24-2 thresholding program in a hospital eye service (HES) glaucoma clinic. Methods: A random sample or individua... Aims: To evaluate performance of frequency doubling technology (FDT) perimetry using the Humphrey Matrix 24-2 thresholding program in a hospital eye service (HES) glaucoma clinic. Methods: A random sample or individuals referred consecut ively to the HES for suspected glaucoma were examined with 24-2 threshold FDT i n addition to routine clinical tests. The discriminatory power of FDTand standar d automated perimetry (SAP) were assessed using glaucomatous optic nerve head ap pearance as the reference gold standard. Results: 48 of 62 eligible referred ind ividualswere recruited. Glaucoma prevalence was 31%. Median test duration per e ye was 5 minutes 16 seconds for FDT and 5 minutes 9 seconds for SAP. There was n o significant difference (p=0.184) between proportions of individuals with relia ble test results (FDT 75%, SAP 63%). Using a clinically appropriate binary criterion for abnormal visual field, sensitivity and specificity levels were 100%and 26%respectively for FDT and 80%and 52%f or SAP. Both tests had higher negative than positive predictive values with marg inal differences between tests. Criterion free receiver operator characteristic analysis revealed minimal discriminatory power differences. Conclusions: In a HE S glaucoma clinic in which new referrals are evaluated, threshold 24-2 FDT test ing with the Humphrey Matrix has performance characteristics similar to SAP. The se findings suggest threshold testing using the FDT Matrix and SAP is comparable when the 24-2 test pattern is used. 展开更多
关键词 视野检查 Humphrey 眼保健 检测模式 阴性预测值 阳性预测值 金标准 域值 持续时间 随机抽样
下载PDF
原发性开角型青光眼视野进行性缺损的危险因素
2
作者 spry p.g.d. Sparrow J.M. +2 位作者 Diamond J.P. Harris H.S. 王大江 《世界核心医学期刊文摘(眼科学分册)》 2005年第10期28-29,共2页
Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate routine ophthalmic data to iden tify clinically useful risk factors for progressive visual field loss in patient swith primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) already receivin... Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate routine ophthalmic data to iden tify clinically useful risk factors for progressive visual field loss in patient swith primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) already receiving intraocular pressure -lowering treatments. Methods: A retrospective cohort study design was used. Ro utine ophthalmic data for all subjects were obtained from case records with the knowledge that baseline clinical data had been collected in a standardised manne r. Progression was defined according to the AGIS visual field defect scoring sys tem. Variables evaluated as candidate risk factors for progression were assessed by survival analysis. Factors exerting a significant effect on survival were su bsequently tested in a Cox proportional hazards model. Results: A cohort of 108 eligible POAG patients was followed over an average of 3.6 years, with an averag e visual field intertest interval of 8months. The incidence rate of progressive loss among the cohort was 5.4 cases per 100 person years. Increasing age was fou nd to be independently associated with a small but significantly increased risk of glaucomatous visual field defect progression (hazard ratio 1.07, P=0.022), an d a borderline association was also demonstrated with being male (hazard ratio 2 .76, P=0.057). Conclusions: This retrospective investigation has provided prelim inary information on factors associated with increased risk of progressive glauc omatous visual field loss that may inform clinical care strategies. Lack of conc ordance with other studies suggests that further prospective investigations are needed if risk stratification strategies are to be employed in caring for patien ts with chronic open-angle glaucoma. 展开更多
关键词 视野缺损 视野检查 降眼压治疗 危险分层 生存分析 回顾性队列研究 平均间隔 危险率 模型验证 基线资料
下载PDF
上一页 1 下一页 到第
使用帮助 返回顶部