Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate diagnostic precision and prove equivalence of 2 devices, Advanced vision analyzer (AVA, Elisar Vision Technology) and Humphrey field analyzer (HFA, Zeiss) for the detection of glaucoma on 10-2 program. DESIGN: Prospective, cross-sectional, observational study. PARTICIPANTS: Threshold estimates of 1 eye each of 66 patients with glaucoma, 36 control participants, and 10 glaucoma suspects were analyzed on 10-2 test with AVA and HFA. METHODS: Mean sensitivity (MS) values of 68 points and central 16 test points were calculated and compared. Intraclass correlation (ICC), Bland-Altman (BA) plots, linear regression of MS, mean deviation (MD), and pattern standard deviation (PSD) were computed to assess the 10-2 threshold estimate of the devices. Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated for MS and MD values, and the area under the curve (AUC) was compared with assessing diagnostic precision. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean sensitivity values of 68 points and central 16 points, AUC for MS and MD values, ICC values, BA plots, and linear-regression analysis. RESULTS: Bland-Altman plot showed significant correlation for MS, MD, and PSD values for both devices. For MS, the overall ICC value was 0.96 (P < 0.001) with a mean bias of 0.0 dB and limits of agreement range of 7.59. The difference in MS values between both devices was -0.4760 ± 1.95 (P > 0.05). The AUC for MS values for AVA was 0.89 and for HFA was 0.92 (P = 0.188); whereas it was similar at 0.88 for MD values (P = 0.799). Advanced vision analyzer and HFA identically discriminated between healthy and patients with glaucoma (P < 0.001), although HFA denoted marginally greater ability (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Statistical results denote adequate equivalence between AVA and HFA because threshold estimates of AVA strongly correlate with HFA for 10-2 program. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.