Abstract :
Purpoe: To report a novel binocular perimetry tet to identify monocular functional viion lo.
Method: In a propective tudy, 10 patient with monocular functional viion lo, 10 patient with monocular organic viion lo, and 10 normal ubject were teted uing a Humphrey automated perimeter attachment that perform central threhold perimetry of both eye in a ingle tet. Firt, patient were teted after being told their “good” (unaffected) eye wa being teted; thi wa followed by a econd identical tet aid to be on the “bad” (affected) eye. Two meaurement were calculated for each ubject: the functional component (ΔF), defined a the difference (in dB) between the mean threhold of the firt and econd tet, and the organic component (ΔO), the difference (in dB) between the mean threhold of the unaffected and affected eye.
Reult: Patient with monocular functional viion lo produced lower threhold when they thought their affected eye alone wa being teted but little intereye difference (mean ΔF ± D = 17.35 ± 7.50 dB; mean ΔO = 0.01 ± 1.40 dB). Patient with monocular organic viion lo had little difference between tet and lower threhold in their affected eye (mean ΔF = 0.84 ± 1.15 dB; mean ΔO = 9.01 ± 4.71 dB). Normal ubject demontrated little intertet or intereye difference (mean ΔF = −0.15 ± 0.78 dB; mean ΔO = −0.05 ± 0.51 dB).
Concluion: Thi perimetry method effectively ditinguihed between normal ubject, patient with monocular functional viion lo, and patient with monocular organic viion lo.
