Hammad Sarwar, Omar Farooq, Naila Obaid, Saima Majid.
Comparison between Swedish interactive threshold algorithm fast and Swedish interactive threshold algoritm standard using Humphery visual field analyzer in patients of glaucoma.
Isra Med J Jan ;5(4):228-31.

Objective: To compare the global indices obtained by Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA)-Standard strategy with those obtained by SITA-Fast strategy using Humphrey Visual Field Analyzer, in patients of glaucoma. Study Design: Cross Sectional / Validative Study. Place and Duration of Study: Armed Forces Institute of Opthalmology, between March and September 2010. Materials and Methods: SITA Standard and SITA Fast visual field analysis of 184 patients were carried out on Humphrey Visual Field Analyzer (HFA-II) using white on white perimetry with 30-2 program on consecutive patients that fit the inclusion criteria, presenting to Armed Forces Institute of Ophthalmology (Rwp) between March 2010 and September 2010. Value of Pattern Standard Deviation (PSD), Mean Deviation (MD) and time taken to complete the examination were noted.. A p-value of <0.05 was considered significant. Results: The Mean Deviation (MD) as calculated by the HFA-II, using the SITA Standard algorithm was -14.03 ± 6.31 dB, MD calculated by SITA Fast algorithm was -13.8 ± 6.2 dB, with no significant difference between the two, p>0.05 The mean PSD as calculated by the HFA-II, using the SITA Standard algorithm was 7.7 ± 4.4 dB, PSD using the SITA Fast algorithm was 7.5 ± 4.2 dB, with no significant difference between them, p≥0.05. It took 6:34 ± 2.1 minutes to complete the examination with the Fast strategy and 9.3±2.6 minutes with the Standard Strategy. The results were significant. Conclusion: SITA Fast strategy takes significantly less time to complete an examination with the same reliability as SITA Standard strategy.

PakMediNet -Pakistan's largest Database of Pakistani Medical Journals - http://www.pakmedinet.com