Variability and Power to Detect Progression of Different Visual Field Patterns

PURPOSE

To compare the variability and ability to detect visual field (VF) progression of 24-2, central 12 locations of the 24-2 and 10-2 VF tests in eyes with abnormal VFs.

DESIGN

Retrospective, multisite cohort.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 52 806 24-2 and 11 966 10-2 VF tests from 7307 eyes from the Glaucoma Research Network database were analyzed. Only eyes with ≥ 5 visits and ≥ 2 years of follow-up were included.

METHODS

Linear regression models were used to calculate the rates of mean deviation (MD) change (slopes), whereas their residuals were used to assess variability across the entire MD range. Computer simulations (n = 10 000) based on real MD residuals of our sample were performed to estimate power to detect significant progression (P < 5%) at various rates of MD change.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Time required to detect progression.

RESULTS

For all 3 patterns, the MD variability was highest within the -5 to -20 decibel (dB) range and consistently lower with the 10-2 compared with 24-2 or central 24-2. Overall, time to detect confirmed significant progression at 80% power was the lowest with 10-2 VF, with a decrease of 14.6% to 18.5% when compared with 24-2 and a decrease of 22.9% to 26.5% when compared with central 24-2.

CONCLUSIONS

Time to detect central VF progression was reduced with 10-2 MD compared with 24-2 and C24-2 MD in glaucoma eyes in this large dataset, in part because 10-2 tests had lower variability. These findings contribute to current evidence of the potential value of 10-2 testing in the clinical management of patients with glaucoma and in clinical trial design.