The TsiogkaSpaeth grid for detection of neurological visual field defects: a validation study.
Hemianopia
Neurological disease
The TsiogkaSpaeth grid test
Visual field
Journal
Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology
ISSN: 1590-3478
Titre abrégé: Neurol Sci
Pays: Italy
ID NLM: 100959175
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 Jan 2024
08 Jan 2024
Historique:
received:
29
11
2023
accepted:
02
01
2024
medline:
9
1
2024
pubmed:
9
1
2024
entrez:
8
1
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
The TsiogkaSpaeth (TS) grid is a new, low-cost, and easy to access portable test for visual field (VF) screening which could be used by clinicians in everyday clinical practice. Our study aimed to determine the validity of an innovative screening grid test for identifying neurological disease-associated VF defects. We enrolled two groups of participants: We assessed the one eye of ten consecutive adult patients with different types of neurological disease associated VF defects and ten eyes of controls in each group. The TS grid test was performed in each group. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the TS grid scotoma area were assessed using the 24-2 VF Humphrey field analyzer (HFA) as the reference standard. Sensitivity and specificity of the TS grid test were 100% and 90.91%, respectively. The area under curve was 0.9545 with 95% CI 0.87-1.00. There was a significant correlation between the number of missed locations on the TS grid test and the visual field index of the HFA 24-2 (r = 0.9436, P < .0001). The sensitivity and specificity of the TS grid test were high in detecting VF defects in neurological disease. The TS grid test appears to be a reliable, low-cost, and easily accessed alternative to traditional VF tests in diagnosing typical neurological patterns of visual field defects. It would be useful in screening subjects for neurologically derived ocular morbidity in everyday clinical practice and in remote areas deprived of specialized health care services.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The TsiogkaSpaeth (TS) grid is a new, low-cost, and easy to access portable test for visual field (VF) screening which could be used by clinicians in everyday clinical practice. Our study aimed to determine the validity of an innovative screening grid test for identifying neurological disease-associated VF defects.
METHODS
METHODS
We enrolled two groups of participants: We assessed the one eye of ten consecutive adult patients with different types of neurological disease associated VF defects and ten eyes of controls in each group. The TS grid test was performed in each group. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the TS grid scotoma area were assessed using the 24-2 VF Humphrey field analyzer (HFA) as the reference standard.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Sensitivity and specificity of the TS grid test were 100% and 90.91%, respectively. The area under curve was 0.9545 with 95% CI 0.87-1.00. There was a significant correlation between the number of missed locations on the TS grid test and the visual field index of the HFA 24-2 (r = 0.9436, P < .0001).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The sensitivity and specificity of the TS grid test were high in detecting VF defects in neurological disease. The TS grid test appears to be a reliable, low-cost, and easily accessed alternative to traditional VF tests in diagnosing typical neurological patterns of visual field defects. It would be useful in screening subjects for neurologically derived ocular morbidity in everyday clinical practice and in remote areas deprived of specialized health care services.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38191765
doi: 10.1007/s10072-024-07305-1
pii: 10.1007/s10072-024-07305-1
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Rowe FJ (2016) Visual fields via the visual pathway, 2nd, edition. CRC Press, Boca Raton
Kedar S, Ghate D, Corbett JJ (2011) Visual fields in neuro-ophthalmology. Indian J Ophthalmol 59(2):103–109. https://doi.org/10.4103/0301-4738.77013
doi: 10.4103/0301-4738.77013
pubmed: 21350279
pmcid: 3116538
Hepworth LR, Rowe FJ (2018) Programme choice for perimetry in neurological conditions (PoPiN): a systematic review of perimetry options and patterns of visual field loss. BMC Ophthalmol 18(1):241. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-018-0912-1 . (Published)
doi: 10.1186/s12886-018-0912-1
pubmed: 30200926
pmcid: 6131852
Tsapakis S, Papaconstantinou D, Diagourtas A et al (2017) Visual field examination method using virtual reality glasses compared with the Humphrey perimeter. Clin Ophthalmol 11:1431–1443. https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S131160 . (Published)
doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S131160
pubmed: 28848325
pmcid: 5557117
Wu Z, Medeiros FA (2018) Recent developments in visual field testing for glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 29(2):141–146. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICU.0000000000000461
doi: 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000461
pubmed: 29256895
Parthasarathi P, Stokkermans TJ (2023) Tests for potential vision. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing, Treasure Island
Broadway DC, Kyari F (2019) Examining visual fields. Community Eye Health 32(107):58–59
pubmed: 32123478
pmcid: 7041825
Trobe JD, Acosta PC, Krischer JP, Trick GL (1981) Confrontation visual field techniques in the detection of anterior visual pathway lesions. Ann Neurol 10(1):28–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.410100105
doi: 10.1002/ana.410100105
pubmed: 7271230
Johnson LN, Baloh FG (1991) The accuracy of confrontation visual field test in comparison with automated perimetry. J Natl Med Assoc 83(10):895–898
pubmed: 1800764
pmcid: 2571584
Ruia S, Tripathy K (2023) Humphrey visual field. [Updated 2023 Aug 25]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing, Treasure Island. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK585112/
Gloor BP (2009) Franz Fankhauser: the father of the automated perimeter. Surv Ophthalmol 54(3):417–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.survophthal.2009.02.007
doi: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2009.02.007
pubmed: 19422969
Tsapakis S, Papaconstantinou D, Diagourtas A et al (2018) Home-based visual field test for glaucoma screening comparison with Humphrey perimeter. Clin Ophthalmol 12:2597–2606. https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S187832 . (Published)
doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S187832
pubmed: 30587906
pmcid: 6296209
Nakanishi M, Wang YT, Jung TP et al (2017) Detecting glaucoma with a portable brain-computer interface for objective assessment of visual function loss. JAMA Ophthalmol 135(6):550–557. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.0738
doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.0738
pubmed: 28448641
pmcid: 5772598
Wroblewski D, Francis BA, Sadun A, Vakili G, Chopra V (2014) Testing of visual field with virtual reality goggles in manual and visual grasp modes. Biomed Res Int 2014:206082. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/206082
doi: 10.1155/2014/206082
pubmed: 25050326
pmcid: 4090491
Hollander DA, Volpe NJ, Moster ML et al (2000) Use of a portable head mounted perimetry system to assess bedside visual fields. Br J Ophthalmol 84(10):1185–1190. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.84.10.1185
doi: 10.1136/bjo.84.10.1185
pubmed: 11004108
pmcid: 1723249
Bengtsson B, Heijl A (2008) A visual field index for calculation of glaucoma rate of progression. Am J Ophthalmol 145(2):343–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2007.09.038
doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2007.09.038
pubmed: 18078852