Different strategies for Humphrey automated perimetry: FASTPAC, SITA standard and SITA fast in normal subjects and glaucoma patients.

PURPOSE To evaluate the influence on examination time and test quality of the recently introduced SITA strategies of the Humphrey Field Analyzer. METHODS The sample consisted of 41 subjects (19 normal subjects and 22 glaucoma patients), all experienced in automated perimetry, ranging in age from 24 to 83 years. One eye of each patient was examined with the HC30-2 program using the FASTPAC (FP) and SITA Standard (SS) or SITA Fast (SF) strategy on the same day, in random order. Examination time was evaluated as a function of the strategy. To evaluate the test quality both regional and global visual field parameters were analyzed. Global parameters included mean deviation (MD) and pattern standard deviation (PSD). Regional parameters (mean and maximum loss) were calculated to estimate the extent and the depth of localized visual field defects. For this purpose each visual field was divided in 4 quadrants and in 10 clusters as defined in the glaucoma hemifield test. RESULTS 1. There is a considerable test time reduction from FASTPAC over SITA Standard to SITA Fast for comparable MD and PSD values. On average, the SITA Fast test duration is half that of the FASTPAC procedure. For each strategy, the test duration increases for increasing visual field loss. 2. Between all three strategies, there is a good correlation for the global indices (MD, PSD) 3. For the regional indices (mean loss, maximum loss) the same high correlation exists. CONCLUSION The SITA strategy causes a significant test time reduction without decreasing the test quality.