Advancements in Visual Field Testing: A Systematic Review of the 24-2C Test Grid
A systematic review was conducted of studies published up to 30 August 2024. Studies comparing conventional visual field (VF) indices, ability to detect central visual field defects (CVFDs), structure–function (S-F) concordance, and test characteristics across the HVF 24-2C SITA-Faster, 24-2 SITA-St...
Saved in:
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
MDPI AG
2025-06-01
|
Series: | Bioengineering |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/12/7/711 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
_version_ | 1839616511643222016 |
---|---|
author | Eric Jin Natalie Shi Qi Wong Claire Xin Yi Goh Michael W. Stewart Syril Dorairaj Bryan Chin Hou Ang |
author_facet | Eric Jin Natalie Shi Qi Wong Claire Xin Yi Goh Michael W. Stewart Syril Dorairaj Bryan Chin Hou Ang |
author_sort | Eric Jin |
collection | DOAJ |
description | A systematic review was conducted of studies published up to 30 August 2024. Studies comparing conventional visual field (VF) indices, ability to detect central visual field defects (CVFDs), structure–function (S-F) concordance, and test characteristics across the HVF 24-2C SITA-Faster, 24-2 SITA-Standard/Faster, and 10-2 SITA-Standard/Fast tests were included. Eight studies with 1239 subjects (49.1% male; mean age, 54.8–66.9 years) were analyzed. The 24-2C produced similar global VF indices compared to the 10-2 and 24-2 (Standard/Faster) (ICC = 0.95 and 0.80, <i>p</i> < 0.001), detected more VF defects and CVFD clusters, and demonstrated greater S-F concordance than the 24-2 (Standard/Faster). Although the 10-2 (Standard/Fast) detected significantly more CVFDs and had a greater S-F concordance, the agreement between the 24-2C and 10-2 grids was substantial (ĸ = 0.488 to 0.708). The 24-2C was also faster compared to the 24-2 Standard and 10-2 (Standard/Fast), with comparable false positives, higher false negatives, and fewer fixation losses than the 24-2 Standard. In conclusion, the HVF 24-2C is quicker and identifies more CVFDs than the 24-2 grid, demonstrates high agreement with the 10-2 grid, and aids in CVFD screening. |
format | Article |
id | doaj-art-f1569c1c3dc84dd78c2e4f6e6d55be00 |
institution | Matheson Library |
issn | 2306-5354 |
language | English |
publishDate | 2025-06-01 |
publisher | MDPI AG |
record_format | Article |
series | Bioengineering |
spelling | doaj-art-f1569c1c3dc84dd78c2e4f6e6d55be002025-07-25T13:14:41ZengMDPI AGBioengineering2306-53542025-06-0112771110.3390/bioengineering12070711Advancements in Visual Field Testing: A Systematic Review of the 24-2C Test GridEric Jin0Natalie Shi Qi Wong1Claire Xin Yi Goh2Michael W. Stewart3Syril Dorairaj4Bryan Chin Hou Ang5Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117597, SingaporeYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117597, SingaporeYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117597, SingaporeDepartment of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL 32206, USADepartment of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL 32206, USAYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117597, SingaporeA systematic review was conducted of studies published up to 30 August 2024. Studies comparing conventional visual field (VF) indices, ability to detect central visual field defects (CVFDs), structure–function (S-F) concordance, and test characteristics across the HVF 24-2C SITA-Faster, 24-2 SITA-Standard/Faster, and 10-2 SITA-Standard/Fast tests were included. Eight studies with 1239 subjects (49.1% male; mean age, 54.8–66.9 years) were analyzed. The 24-2C produced similar global VF indices compared to the 10-2 and 24-2 (Standard/Faster) (ICC = 0.95 and 0.80, <i>p</i> < 0.001), detected more VF defects and CVFD clusters, and demonstrated greater S-F concordance than the 24-2 (Standard/Faster). Although the 10-2 (Standard/Fast) detected significantly more CVFDs and had a greater S-F concordance, the agreement between the 24-2C and 10-2 grids was substantial (ĸ = 0.488 to 0.708). The 24-2C was also faster compared to the 24-2 Standard and 10-2 (Standard/Fast), with comparable false positives, higher false negatives, and fewer fixation losses than the 24-2 Standard. In conclusion, the HVF 24-2C is quicker and identifies more CVFDs than the 24-2 grid, demonstrates high agreement with the 10-2 grid, and aids in CVFD screening.https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/12/7/711glaucomavisual field24-2C |
spellingShingle | Eric Jin Natalie Shi Qi Wong Claire Xin Yi Goh Michael W. Stewart Syril Dorairaj Bryan Chin Hou Ang Advancements in Visual Field Testing: A Systematic Review of the 24-2C Test Grid Bioengineering glaucoma visual field 24-2C |
title | Advancements in Visual Field Testing: A Systematic Review of the 24-2C Test Grid |
title_full | Advancements in Visual Field Testing: A Systematic Review of the 24-2C Test Grid |
title_fullStr | Advancements in Visual Field Testing: A Systematic Review of the 24-2C Test Grid |
title_full_unstemmed | Advancements in Visual Field Testing: A Systematic Review of the 24-2C Test Grid |
title_short | Advancements in Visual Field Testing: A Systematic Review of the 24-2C Test Grid |
title_sort | advancements in visual field testing a systematic review of the 24 2c test grid |
topic | glaucoma visual field 24-2C |
url | https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/12/7/711 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ericjin advancementsinvisualfieldtestingasystematicreviewofthe242ctestgrid AT natalieshiqiwong advancementsinvisualfieldtestingasystematicreviewofthe242ctestgrid AT clairexinyigoh advancementsinvisualfieldtestingasystematicreviewofthe242ctestgrid AT michaelwstewart advancementsinvisualfieldtestingasystematicreviewofthe242ctestgrid AT syrildorairaj advancementsinvisualfieldtestingasystematicreviewofthe242ctestgrid AT bryanchinhouang advancementsinvisualfieldtestingasystematicreviewofthe242ctestgrid |