Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Post-examination processing in the SITA standard algorithm compromises the advantage of a faster patient testing time

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Ophthalmology

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the time taken for Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA)-standard (SITA-s) data management from first stimulus to printed results.

Methods

Prospective case series. Twenty-one subjects underwent visual field testing of the right eye with both SITA-s and Humphrey Full Threshold (FTT). The order of the tests (SITA-s and FTT) were randomized for each subject.

Results

The time-to-finish calculation and saving was significantly longer for SITA-s (41%, p<0.001) than FTT. The patient testing time and total testing time was 47% and 39% shorter with SITA than with FTT, respectively (p<0.001).

Conclusion

The data processing of the SITA-s compromises by 8% (p<0.001) some of the advantages of the faster patient testing time.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Flanagan JG, Wild JM, Trope GE. Evaluation of FASTPAC, a new strategy for threshold estimation with the Humphrey Field Analyzer, in a glaucomatous population. Ophthalmology 1993;100: 949–954.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Donahue SP, Porter A. SITA visual field testing in children. J AAPOS. 2001;5:114–117.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Shirato S, Inoue R, Fukushima K, et al. Clinical evaluation of SITA: a new family of perimetric testing strategies. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1999;237:29–34.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bengtsson B, Heijl A, Olsson J. Evaluation of a new threshold visual field strategy, SITA, in normal subjects. Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1998;76(2): 165–169.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bengtsson B, Heijl A. Evaluation of a new perimetric threshold strategy, SITA, in patients with manifest and suspect glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1998;76:268–272.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Bengtsson B, Heijl A. Latest innovations for the primary Humphrey Field Analyzer. In: Visual Field Testing With the Humphrey Field Analyzer: A Text and Clinical Atlas, 2nd ed. (Choplin NT, Edwards RP, eds.) Thorofare, NJ: Slack Incorporated, 1999: pp. 187–192.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Sekhar GC, Naduvilath TJ, Lakkai M, et al. Sensitivity of Swedish Interactive threshold Algorithm compared with Standard Full threshold Algorithm in Humphrey visual field testing. Ophthalmology 2000;107:1303–1308.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Bengtsson B, Olsson J, Heijl A, et al. A new generation of algorithms for computerized threshold perimetry, SITA. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1997;75:368–375.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bengtsson B, Heijl A. SITA Fast: a new rapid perimetric threshold test. Description of methods and evaluation in patients with manifest and suspect glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1998;76: 431–437.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Wall M, Punke SG, Stickney TL, et al. SITA Standard in optic neuropathies and hemianopias: a comparison with full threshold testing. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:528–537.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Wild JM, Pacey IE, Hancock SA, et al. Between-algorithm, between-individual differences in normal perimetric sensitivity: full threshold, FASTPAC, and SITA. Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999;40:1152–1161.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Bengtsson B, Heijl A. Inter-subject variability and normal limits of the SITA Standard, SITA Fast, and the Humphrey Full Threshold computerized perimetry strategies, SITA STATPAC. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1999;77:125–129.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Heijl A, Bengtsson B, Patella M. Glaucoma follow-up when converting from long to short perimetric threshold tests. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000;118:489–493.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University Health Network, Toronto Western Hospital and University of Toronto, 399 Bathurst Street, NEW 6-405, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5T 2S8

    Monica M. Carrillo MD,  Graham E. Trope MB, PhD, FRCSC,  John G. Flanagan PhD &  Yvonne M. Buys MD, FRCSC

Authors
  1. Monica M. Carrillo MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Graham E. Trope MB, PhD, FRCSC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John G. Flanagan PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yvonne M. Buys MD, FRCSC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yvonne M. Buys MD, FRCSC.

Additional information

Drs. Carrillo, Trope, and Buys have stated that they do not have any significant financial interest or other relationship with any product manufacturer or provider of services discussed in this article. They also do not discuss the use of off-label products, which includes unlabeled, unapproved, or investigative products or devices. Dr. John Flanagan does have a significant financial interest or other relationship (as a paid consultant on a independent project for Humphrey Instruments) with a product manufacturer or provider of services discussed in this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Carrillo, M.M., Trope, G.E., Flanagan, J.G. et al. Post-examination processing in the SITA standard algorithm compromises the advantage of a faster patient testing time. Ann Ophthalmol 37, 91–94 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1385/AO:37:2:091

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1385/AO:37:2:091

Keywords

Search

Navigation