Article Text
Abstract
Background/Aims To assess whether mean deviation (MD) from automated perimetry is related to the visual field (VF) component for legal fitness to drive (LFTD) in glaucoma patients.
Methods Monocular 24-2 VFs of 2604 patients with bilateral VF damage were retrospectively investigated. Integrated visual fields were calculated and used as a surrogate to assess LFTD according to current UK driving licence criteria. The better eye MD (BEMD), worse eye MD (WEMD) and a measure utilising MD of both eyes were compared, to assess respective diagnostic capabilities to predict LFTD (using the integrated visual field surrogate test as the gold standard) and a ‘Probability of Failure’ (PoF) for various defect levels was calculated.
Results BEMD appears to be a good predictor of the VF component for a patient's LFTD (receiver operating characteristic area under the curve: 96.2%); MDs from both eyes offered no significant extra diagnostic power (area under the curve: 96.4%). PoF for BEMD thresholds of ≤−10 dB and ≤−14 dB were 70 (95% CI 66% to 74%) and 92% (87% to 95%), respectively.
Conclusion There is a strong relationship between BEMD and a patient's LFTD. PoF values for LFTD associated with readily available MD values provide practical landmarks for VF disability in glaucoma.
- Visual field
- perimetry
- visual impairment
- driving
- glaucoma
- imaging
- optic nerve
- vision
- psychophysics
- field of vision
- intraocular pressure
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
-
Funding This work was funded in part by the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services Research programme (project number 10/2000/68). Crabb's research laboratory at City University in London is supported in part by unrestricted funding from Allergan Ltd and the Investigator-Initiated Studies Programme of Merck Sharp & Dohme Limited.
-
Competing interests None.
-
Patient consent Patient database investigated was anonymised.
-
Ethics approval The Research and Ethics committee of the Department of Optometry and Visual science at City University.
-
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.