Short-Listing the Program Choice for Perimetry in Neurological Conditions (PoPiN) Using Consensus Methods

Hepworth, Lauren ORCID: 0000-0001-8542-9815 and Rowe, Fiona ORCID: 0000-0001-9210-9131
(2019) Short-Listing the Program Choice for Perimetry in Neurological Conditions (PoPiN) Using Consensus Methods. British and Irish Orthoptic Journal, 15 (1). pp. 125-132.

[img] Text
Hepworth Rowe Short-listing the programme choice for perimetry in neurological conditions using consensus methods.pdf - Published version

Download (1MB) | Preview


Background: Neurological conditions frequently cause visual field loss, commonly resulting in perimetry requests for suspected or known conditions. Currently there are no national guidelines for perimetry in neurological conditions. A wide choice of perimetry programs exists. An inappropriate program choice could fail to detect visual field loss. Two phases in this study determined preference of perimetry pro-grams for detection of visual field loss in four common neurological conditions (idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH), optic neuropathies, chiasmal compression and stroke), to aid the design of research and clinical practice guidelines.Methods: A survey consisted of 47 perimetry programs. Orthoptists and neuro-ophthalmologists were asked which perimetry programs they considered important for use in the four neurological conditions. These programs were short-listed for discussion in a consensus meeting. A nominal group technique was used for the consensus meeting to reach consensus on the three most favoured perimetry programs appropriate for the four conditions.Results: Twenty-six participants completed the survey (51% return rate). Nine programs were found to be not applicable to any of the conditions. The short-lists for the conditions varied between six and ten perimetry programs. Seven participants discussed the survey results at a consensus meeting to agree the three most favoured perimetry programs for IIH, optic neuropathy and chiasmal compression (manual/semi manual kinetic, static 30–2 and full-field 120) and for stroke (manual/semi manual kinetic, static 30–2 and monocular Esterman).Conclusion: A wide range of perimetry programmes were explored thoroughly through survey and consensus methods in order to determine clinician preference for their use in neuro-ophthalmic practice. The three most favoured perimetry programs for the four conditions was established.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: Perimetry, Visual field loss, idiopathic intracranial hypertension;, Chiasmal compression, Stroke, Optic neuropathy
Depositing User: Symplectic Admin
Date Deposited: 18 Nov 2019 09:23
Last Modified: 19 Jan 2023 00:20
DOI: 10.22599/bioj.143
Related URLs: