Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the results of the IMO vifa 24plus(1-2) and HFA 24-2 visual field tests. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included 52 patients (104 eyes) with glaucoma who visited Chukyo Eye Clinic between June 2023 and March 2024. On the same day, the HFA 24-2 test using the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm Standard and the IMO vifa 24plus(1-2) test using the Ambient Interactive Zippy Estimated strategy were performed. A Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare fixation, false positives, false negatives, and total test time for both eyes between the HFA and IMO vifa tests. Only eyes with reliable test results were selected, and the visual field index (VFI), mean deviation (MD), and pattern standard deviation (PSD) were examined using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: The test times for the HFA 24-2 and IMO vifa 24plus(1-2) were 716.83±118.80 and 628.75±142.70 s, respectively, with the IMO vifa being significantly shorter (P<0.001). For fixation, the results were 15.85±16.57% and 11.09±15.20%, with significantly better fixation in the IMO vifa (P<0.0001). False positives and negatives were 4.52±5.19 / 4.14±6.85% and 4.97±7.99 / 5.47±7.86%, respectively, with no significant differences, though the IMO vifa showed a slightly higher trend (P=0.980, 0.056). In eyes with reliable results, the HFA 24-2 and IMO vifa 24plus(1-2) outcomes were as follows: MD (-6.45±7.23, -6.85±7.35, P=0.724), PSD (7.13±4.75, 7.49±4.87, P=0.061), VFI (80.86±21.61, 80.86±21.74, P=0.644). The Spearman rank correlation coefficients between the HFA 24-2 and IMO vifa 24plus(1-2) were MD: 0.938, PSD: 0.949, VFI: 0.932 (all P<0.001). CONCLUSION: The IMO vifa demonstrates a very high correlation with HFA and allows for a shorter examination time. Fixation errors are significantly improved compared to HFA, while there is no significant difference in false positives or false negatives.