Inferior field loss increases rate of falls in older adults with glaucoma

PURPOSE: To examine the visual predictors of falls and injurious falls among older adults with glaucoma. METHODS: Prospective falls data were collected for 71 community-dwelling adults with primary open-angle glaucoma, mean age 73.9 ± 5.7 years, for one year using monthly falls diaries. Baseline assessment of central visual function included high-contrast visual acuity and Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity. Binocular integrated visual fields were derived from monocular Humphrey Field Analyser plots. Rate ratios (RR) for falls and injurious falls with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were based on negative binomial regression models. RESULTS: During the one year follow-up, 31 (44%) participants experienced at least one fall and 22 (31%) experienced falls that resulted in an injury. Greater visual impairment was associated with increased falls rate, independent of age and gender. In a multivariate model, more extensive field loss in the inferior region was associated with higher rate of falls (RR 1.57, 95%CI 1.06, 2.32) and falls with injury (RR 1.80, 95%CI 1.12, 2.98), adjusted for all other vision measures and potential confounding factors. Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and superior field loss were not associated with the rate of falls; topical beta-blocker use was also not associated with increased falls risk. CONCLUSIONS: Falls are common among older adults with glaucoma and occur more frequently in those with greater visual impairment, particularly in the inferior field region. This finding highlights the importance of the inferior visual field region in falls risk and assists in identifying older adults with glaucoma at risk of future falls, for whom potential interventions should be targeted. KEY WORDS: glaucoma, visual field, visual impairment, falls, injury

Global flash multifocal electroretinogram : early detection of local functional changes and its correlations with optical coherence tomography and visual field loss in diabetic eyes

Purpose: To investigate the correlations of the global flash multifocal electroretinogram (MOFO mfERG) with common clinical visual assessments – Humphrey perimetry and Stratus circumpapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness measurement in type II diabetic patients. Methods: Forty-two diabetic patients participated in the study: ten were free from diabetic retinopathy (DR) while the remainder suffered from mild to moderate non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR). Fourteen age-matched controls were recruited for comparison. MOFO mfERG measurements were made under high and low contrast conditions. Humphrey central 30-2 perimetry and Stratus OCT circumpapillary RNFL thickness measurements were also performed. Correlations between local values of implicit time and amplitude of the mfERG components (direct component (DC) and induced component (IC)), and perimetric sensitivity and RNFL thickness were evaluated by mapping the localized responses for the three subject groups. Results: MOFO mfERG was superior to perimetry and RNFL assessments in showing differences between the diabetic groups (with and without DR) and the controls. All the MOFO mfERG amplitudes (except IC amplitude at high contrast) correlated better with perimetry findings (Pearson’s r ranged from 0.23 to 0.36, p<0.01) than did the mfERG implicit time at both high and low contrasts across all subject groups. No consistent correlation was found between the mfERG and RNFL assessments for any group or contrast conditions. The responses of the local MOFO mfERG correlated with local perimetric sensitivity but not with RNFL thickness. Conclusion: Early functional changes in the diabetic retina seem to occur before morphological changes in the RNFL.

Attitudes of consultant ophthalmologists in the UK to initial management of glaucoma patients presenting with severe visual field loss: a national survey

BACKGROUND: Recent National Institute of Clinical Excellence guidance suggests primary surgery should be offered to patients presenting with glaucoma with severe visual field loss. We undertook a survey of UK consultant ophthalmologists to determine if this represents current practice and explore attitudes towards managing patients with advanced glaucoma at presentation.

DESIGN: Questionnaire evaluation study.

PARTICIPANTS: All consultant ophthalmologists currently practicing in the UK.

METHODS: A single-page questionnaire was posted to all consultants (n = 910) currently practicing in the UK along with a pre-paid return envelope. A second questionnaire was sent to non-responders (n = 459).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Questionnaire responses.

RESULTS: 626 responses were received representing 68.8% of the population surveyed. 152 (24%) volunteered a specialist interest in glaucoma. Consensus opinion for both glaucoma specialists (64.9%) and non-glaucoma specialists (62.4%) was to start with primary medical therapy, most commonly citing surgical risk as the primary reason (23% and 22%, respectively) for this approach. Most felt the highest intraocular pressure measurement during follow up (measured in clinic) was the most important variable for prevention of further visual loss (60% of glaucoma specialists and 55% of non-glaucoma specialists). Eighty-three per cent of all responders suggested they would change their practice if evidence supporting primary surgery as a safe and more effective approach existed.

CONCLUSIONS: Recent National Institute of Clinical Excellence guidance does not reflect the current management approach of UK ophthalmologists. The primary concern was related to potential complications of surgery although most practitioners would be willing to change their practice if evidence existed supporting primary surgery in patients presenting with advanced glaucoma.

Methodological variations in estimating apparent progressive visual field loss in clinical trials of glaucoma treatment.

OBJECTIVES:

To compare methods to estimate the incidence of visual field progression used by 3 large randomized trials of glaucoma treatment by applying these methods to a common data set of annually obtained visual field measurements of patients with glaucoma followed up for an average of 6 years.

METHODS:

The methods used by the Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS), the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study (CIGTS), and the Early Manifest Glaucoma Treatment study (EMGT) were applied to 67 eyes of 56 patients with glaucoma enrolled in a 10-year natural history study of glaucoma using Program 30-2 of the Humphrey Field Analyzer (Humphrey Instruments, San Leandro, Calif). The incidence of apparent visual field progression was estimated for each method. Extent of agreement between the methods was calculated, and time to apparent progression was compared.

RESULTS:

The proportion of patients progressing was 11%, 22%, and 23% with AGIS, CIGTS, and EMGT methods, respectively. Clinical assessment identified 23% of patients who progressed, but only half of these were also identified by CIGTS or EMGT methods. The CIGTS and the EMGT had comparable incidence rates, but only half of those identified by 1 method were also identified by the other.

CONCLUSIONS:

The EMGT and CIGTS methods produced rates of apparent progression that were twice those of the AGIS method. Although EMGT, CIGTS, and clinical assessment rates were comparable, they did not identify the same patients as having had field progression.

Traffic gap judgment in people with significant peripheral field loss.

PURPOSE: Subjects with significant peripheral field loss (PFL) self report difficulty in street crossing. In this study, we compared the traffic gap judgment ability of fully sighted and PFL subjects to determine whether accuracy in identifying crossable gaps was adversely affected because of field loss. Moreover, we explored the contribution of visual and nonvisual factors to traffic gap judgment ability. METHODS: Eight subjects with significant PFL as a result of advanced retinitis pigmentosa or glaucoma with binocular visual field <20 degrees and five age-matched normals (NV) were recruited. All subjects were required to judge when they perceived it was safe to cross at a 2-way 4-lane street while they stood on the curb. Eye movements were recorded by an eye tracker as the subjects performed the decision task. Movies of the eye-on-scene were made offline and fixation patterns were classified into either relevant or irrelevant. Subjects' street-crossing behavior, habitual approach to street crossing, and perceived difficulties were assessed. RESULTS: Compared with normal vision (NV) subjects, the PFL subjects identified 12% fewer crossable gaps while making 23% more errors by identifying a gap as crossable when it was too short (p < 0.05). The differences in traffic gap judgment ability of the PFL subjects might be explained by the significantly smaller fixation area (p = 0.006) and fewer fixations distributed to the relevant tasks (p = 0.001). The subjects' habitual approach to street crossing and perceived difficulties in street crossing (r > 0.60) were significantly correlated with traffic gap judgment performance. CONCLUSIONS: As a consequence of significant field loss, limited visual information about the traffic environment can be acquired, resulting in significantly reduced performance in judging safe crossable gaps. This poor traffic gap judgment ability in the PFL subjects raises important concerns for their safety when attempting to cross the street.

The correlation between tests of visual function and perceived visual ability in central field loss patients

Purpose: To investigate the correlation between tests of visual function and perceived visual ability recorded with a 'quality-of-life' questionnaire for patients with central field loss. Method: 12 females and 7 males (mean age = 53.1 years; Range = 23 - 80 years) with subfoveal neovascular membranes underwent a comprehensive assessment of visual function. Tests included unaided distance vision, high and low contrast distance logMAR visual acuity (VA), Pelli-Robson contrast senstivity (at 1m), near logMAR word VA and text reading speed. All tests were done both monocularly and binocularly. The patients also completed a 28 point questionnaire separated into a 'core' section consisting of general questions about perceived visual function and a 'module' section with specific questions on reading function. Results: Step-wise multiple regression analysis was used to determine which visual function tests were correlated with the patients's perceived visual function and to rank them in order of importance. The visual function test that explains most of the variance in both 'core' score (66%0 and the 'module' score (68%) of the questionnaire is low contrast VA in the better eye (P<0.001 in both cases). Further, the module score also accounts for a significant proportion of the variance (P<0.01) of the distance logMAR VA in both the better and worse eye, and the near logMAR in both the better eye and binocularly. Conclusions: The best predictor of both perceived reading ability and of general perceived visual ability in this study is low contrast logMAR VA. The results highlight that distance VA is not the only relevant measure of visual fucntion in relation to a patients's perceived visual performance and should not be considered a determinant of surgical or management success.

Quantification of visual field loss in age-related macular degeneration

Background - An evaluation of standard automated perimetry (SAP) and short wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP) for the central 10–2 visual field test procedure in patients with age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is presented in order to determine methods of quantifying the central sensitivity loss in patients at various stages of AMD. Methods - 10–2 SAP and SWAP Humphrey visual fields and stereoscopic fundus photographs were collected in 27 eyes of 27 patients with AMD and 22 eyes of 22 normal subjects. Results - Mean Deviation and Pattern Standard Deviation (PSD) varied significantly with stage of disease in SAP (both p<0.001) and SWAP (both p<0.001), but post hoc analysis revealed overlap of functional values among stages. In SWAP, indices of focal loss were more sensitive to detecting differences in AMD from normal. SWAP defects were greater in depth and area than those in SAP. Central sensitivity (within 1°) changed by -3.9 and -4.9 dB per stage in SAP and SWAP, respectively. Based on defect maps, an AMD Severity Index was derived. Conclusions - Global indices of focal loss were more sensitive to detecting early stage AMD from normal. The SWAP sensitivity decline with advancing stage of AMD was greater than in SAP. A new AMD Severity Index quantifies visual field defects on a continuous scale. Although not all patients are suitable for SWAP examinations, it is of value as a tool in research studies of visual loss in AMD.

Quantification of visual field loss in age-related macular degeneration

Presentation Purpose:To determine methods of quantifying the sensitivity loss in the central 10o visual field in a cross section of patients at various stages of age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Methods:Standard and short-wavelength automated perimetry (SAP and SWAP) visual fields were collected using program 10-2 of the Humphrey Field Analyzer, in 44 eyes of 27 patients with AMD and 41 eyes of 22 normal subjects. Stereoscopic fundus photographs were graded by two independent observers and the stage of disease determined. Global indices were compared for their ability to delineate the normal visual field from early stages of AMD and to differentiate between stages. Results:Mean Deviation (MD) and Pattern Standard Deviation (PSD) varied significantly with stage of disease in SAP (both p<0.001) and SWAP (both p<0.001), but post-hoc analysis revealed overlap of functional values between stages. Global indices of focal loss, PSD and local spatial variability (LSV) were the most sensitive to detecting differences between normal subjects and early stage AMD patients, in SAP and SWAP, respectively. Overall, defects were confined to the central 5°. SWAP defects were consistently greater in depth and area than those in SAP. The most vulnerable region of the 10° field to sensitivity loss with increasing stage of AMD was the central 1°, in which the sensitivity decline was -4.8dB per stage in SAP and -4.9dB per stage in SWAP. Based on the pattern deviation defect maps, a severity index of AMD visual field loss was derived. Threshold variability was considerably increased in late stage AMD eyes. Conclusions:Global indices of focal loss were more sensitive to the detection of early stage AMD from normal. The sensitivity decline with advancing stage of AMD was greater in SWAP compared to SAP, however the trend was not strong across all stages of disease. The less commonly used index LSV represents relatively statistically unmanipulated summary measure of focal loss. A new severity index is described which is sensitive to visual field change in AMD, measures visual field defects on a continuous scale and may serve as a useful measure of functional change in AMD in longitudinal studies. Keywords: visual fields • age-related macular degeneration • perimetry

Does the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) accurately map visual field loss attributed to vigabatrin?

Background: Vigabatrin (VGB) is an anti-epileptic medication which has been linked to peripheral constriction of the visual field. Documenting the natural history associated with continued VGB exposure is important when making decisions about the risk and benefits associated with the treatment. Due to its speed the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) has become the algorithm of choice when carrying out Full Threshold automated static perimetry. SITA uses prior distributions of normal and glaucomatous visual field behaviour to estimate threshold sensitivity. As the abnormal model is based on glaucomatous behaviour this algorithm has not been validated for VGB recipients. We aim to assess the clinical utility of the SITA algorithm for accurately mapping VGB attributed field loss. Methods: The sample comprised one randomly selected eye of 16 patients diagnosed with epilepsy, exposed to VGB therapy. A clinical diagnosis of VGB attributed visual field loss was documented in 44% of the group. The mean age was 39.3 years∈±∈14.5 years and the mean deviation was -4.76 dB ±4.34 dB. Each patient was examined with the Full Threshold, SITA Standard and SITA Fast algorithm. Results: SITA Standard was on average approximately twice as fast (7.6 minutes) and SITA Fast approximately 3 times as fast (4.7 minutes) as examinations completed using the Full Threshold algorithm (15.8 minutes). In the clinical environment, the visual field outcome with both SITA algorithms was equivalent to visual field examination using the Full Threshold algorithm in terms of visual inspection of the grey scale plots, defect area and defect severity. Conclusions: Our research shows that both SITA algorithms are able to accurately map visual field loss attributed to VGB. As patients diagnosed with epilepsy are often vulnerable to fatigue, the time saving offered by SITA Fast means that this algorithm has a significant advantage for use with VGB recipients.

The value of tablets as reading aids for individuals with central visual field loss:an evaluation of eccentric reading with static and scrolling text

Purpose: Technological devices such as smartphones and tablets are widely available and increasingly used as visual aids. This study evaluated the use of a novel app for tablets (MD_evReader) developed as a reading aid for individuals with a central field loss resulting from macular degeneration. The MD_evReader app scrolls text as single lines (similar to a news ticker) and is intended to enhance reading performance using the eccentric viewing technique by both reducing the demands on the eye movement system and minimising the deleterious effects of perceptual crowding. Reading performance with scrolling text was compared with reading static sentences, also presented on a tablet computer. Methods: Twenty-six people with low vision (diagnosis of macular degeneration) read static or dynamic text (scrolled from right to left), presented as a single line at high contrast on a tablet device. Reading error rates and comprehension were recorded for both text formats, and the participant’s subjective experience of reading with the app was assessed using a simple questionnaire. Results: The average reading speed for static and dynamic text was not significantly different and equal to or greater than 85 words per minute. The comprehension scores for both text formats were also similar, equal to approximately 95% correct. However, reading error rates were significantly (p=0.02) less for dynamic text than for static text. The participants’ questionnaire ratings of their reading experience with the MD_evReader were highly positive and indicated a preference for reading with this app compared with their usual method. Conclusions: Our data show that reading performance with scrolling text is at least equal to that achieved with static text and in some respects (reading error rate) is better than static text. Bespoke apps informed by an understanding of the underlying sensorimotor processes involved in a cognitive task such as reading have excellent potential as aids for people with visual impairments.

Use of NeuroEyeCoach™ to Improve Eye Movement Efficacy in Patients with Homonymous Visual Field Loss

Acknowledgements: We would like to thank Sigrid Kenkel, Susanne Muller, Valentina Varalta, Cristina Fonte, Venecia Alb and Cristina Racasan who have contributed to data collection. Declaration of Interest: AS is Chief Science Officer of NovaVision Inc. NS has no conflict of interest. JZ is a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of NovaVision Inc. This study was supported by a NovaVision Inc. research grant to AS.

Visual field severity indices demonstrate dose-dependent visual loss from Vigabatrin therapy

Purpose: The aims of this study were to develop an algorithm to accurately quantify Vigabatrin (VGB)-induced central visual field loss and to investigate the relationship between visual field loss and maximum daily dose, cumulative dose and duration of dose. Methods: The sample comprised 31 patients (mean age 37.9 years; SD 14.4 years) diagnosed with epilepsy and exposed to VGB. Each participant underwent standard automated static visual field examination of the central visual field. Central visual field loss was determined using continuous scales quantifying severity in terms of area and depth of defect and additionally by symmetry of defect between the two eyes. A simultaneous multiple regression model was used to explore the relationship between these visual field parameters and the drug predictor variables. Results: The regression model indicated that maximum VGB dose was the only factor to be significantly correlated with individual eye severity (right eye: p = 0.020; left eye: p = 0.012) and symmetry of visual field defect (p = 0.024). Conclusions: Maximum daily dose was the single most reliable indicator of those patients likely to exhibit visual field defects due to VGB. These findings suggest that high maximum dose is more likely to result in visual field defects than high cumulative doses or those of long duration.

Visual field size criteria for mobility rehabilitation referral

Purpose. To investigate evidence-based visual field size criteria for referral of low-vision (LV) patients for mobility rehabilitation. Methods. One hundred and nine participants with LV and 41 age-matched participants with normal sight (NS) were recruited. The LV group was heterogeneous with diverse causes of visual impairment. We measured binocular kinetic visual fields with the Humphrey Field Analyzer and mobility performance on an obstacle-rich, indoor course. Mobility was assessed as percent preferred walking speed (PPWS) and number of obstacle-contact errors. The weighted kappa coefficient of association (κr) was used to discriminate LV participants with both unsafe and inefficient mobility from those with adequate mobility on the basis of their visual field size for the full sample and for subgroups according to type of visual field loss and whether or not the participants had previously received orientation and mobility training. Results. LV participants with both PPWS <38% and errors >6 on our course were classified as having inadequate (inefficient and unsafe) mobility compared with NS participants. Mobility appeared to be first compromised when the visual field was less than about 1.2 steradians (sr; solid angle of a circular visual field of about 70° diameter). Visual fields <0.23 and 0.63 sr (31 to 52° diameter) discriminated patients with at-risk mobility for the full sample and across the two subgroups. A visual field of 0.05 sr (15° diameter) discriminated those with critical mobility. Conclusions. Our study suggests that: practitioners should be alert to potential mobility difficulties when the visual field is less than about 1.2 sr (70° diameter); assessment for mobility rehabilitation may be warranted when the visual field is constricted to about 0.23 to 0.63 sr (31 to 52° diameter) depending on the nature of their visual field loss and previous history (at risk); and mobility rehabilitation should be conducted before the visual field is constricted to 0.05 sr (15° diameter; critical).