Study of Optimal Perimetric Testing In @entity1 (OPTIC): Normative Visual Field Values in XXXX .

@entity1 @entity227 @entity558 @entity5494
PURPOSE: We sought to define normative @entity227 ( @entity227 ) values for @entity1 using common clinical test protocols for kinetic and static perimetry. DESIGN: Prospective, observational study. SUBJECTS: We recruited 154 @entity1 aged 5 to 15 years without any @entity558 that would affect the @entity227 (controls) from pediatric clinics at Moorfields Eye Hospital. METHODS: @entity1 performed perimetric assessments in a randomized order using Goldmann and Octopus kinetic perimetry, and Humphrey static perimetry (Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm [SITA] 24-2 FAST), in a single sitting, using standardized clinical protocols, with assessment by a single examiner. Unreliable results (assessed qualitatively) were excluded from the normative data analysis. Linear, piecewise, and quantile mixed-effects regression models were used. We developed a method to display age-specific normative isopters graphically on a @entity227 plot to aid interpretation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Summary measures and graphical plots describing normative @entity227 data for 3 common perimetric tests. RESULTS: Visual field area increased with age on testing with Goldmann isopters III4e, I4e, and I2e (linear regression; P < 0.001) and for Octopus isopters III4e and I4e (linear regression; P < 0.005). Visual field development occurs predominately in the inferotemporal field. Humphrey @entity5494 ( @entity5494 ) showed an increase of 0.3 decibels (dB; 95% CI, 0.21-0.40) @entity5494 per year up to 12 years of age, when adult @entity5494 values were reached and thereafter maintained. CONCLUSIONS: Visual field size and sensitivity increase with age in patterns that are specific to the perimetric approach used. These developmental changes should be accounted for when interpreting perimetric test results in @entity1 , particularly when monitoring change over time.
