Issue: October 2017
August 23, 2017
2 min read
Save

Home monitoring may allow earlier detection of visual field progression

Issue: October 2017
You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com.

Home monitoring the visual field using portable devices may improve detection of progression and be a viable alternative to the increased frequency of tests performed in the clinic.

Perspective from Derek MacDonald, OD, FAAO

Researchers used simulation methods to evaluate the outcomes of home monitoring in addition to in-clinic visual field testing in 43 patients with glaucoma, ocular hypertension or glaucoma suspects.

The iPad tablet-based Melbourne Rapid Fields, or MRF, (Glance Optical) perimetry application was used under clinical supervision along with the Humphrey Visual Field Analyzer (Carl Zeiss Meditec). Three home-monitoring (monthly, every 2 weeks and weekly) and two in-clinic (yearly and monthly) schedules applied over a 5-year period were simulated.

To reproduce a more realistic scenario of variable compliance, possible inaccuracies and false positives, some home-monitored fields were excluded at random from the final evaluation, and the variability of results was manipulated, according to the study.

Within the simulation, increased frequency of visual field testing by home monitoring resulted in improved ability to detect visual field progression, even in situations of imperfect compliance and potential lesser accuracy of home-based devices as compared with clinical perimetry, the researchers reported.

“Our results suggest that home monitoring could lead to earlier intervention for rapidly progressing patients and improved patient outcomes,” the authors wrote.

Although the cost-benefit of home monitoring was not established, it is likely that combination of home-based and in-clinic testing could represent “a viable alternative to the increased in-clinic visual field testing advocated to ensure rapid visual field progression is not missed in the initial period after glaucoma diagnosis, thereby potentially reducing clinical loads,” the authors concluded. – by Michela Cimberle

Disclosure: Anderson reports no conflict of interest. Please see the study for the other authors’ financial disclosures.