Abstract
Purpose Visual field testing is increasingly being performed by optometrists in order to improve glaucoma detection. The aim of this study was to assess the positive predictive value (PPV) of visual field testing as currently practised by optometrists.
Methods A retrospective study was performed of referrals for suspected glaucoma to an ophthalmology department during a 3 month period. The PPV for glaucoma was determined according to the reason for referral.
Results There were 86 referrals for suspected glaucoma. Isolated field loss accounted for 12% of these referrals but no cases of glaucoma detection. These subjects were either false positive referrals or had field defects of nonglaucomatous aetiology (tilted optic disc and porencephalic cyst). The PPV for glaucoma among referrals with isolated field loss was significantly less than that among referrals with field loss in association with corroborative abnormalities (0 vs 60%, p = 0.005). No such difference was found for referrals with raised intraocular pressure (43% vs 57%, p = 0.38) or suspicious discs (25% vs 53%, p = 0.60).
Conclusions Visual field testing is currently leading to unnecessary referrals to the hospital eye service with no detectable improvement in the accuracy of glaucoma suspect referrals. It is important that optometrists perform visual field testing in accordance with validated screening methodology.
Similar content being viewed by others
Article PDF
References
Harrison RJ, Wild JM, Hobley AJ . Referral patterns to an ophthalmic outpatient clinic by general practitioners and ophthalmic opticians and the role of these professionals in screening for ocular disease. BMJ 1988;297:1162–7.
Brittain GPH, Austin DJ, Kelly SP . A prospective study to determine sources and diagnostic accuracy of glaucoma referrals. Health Trends 1988;20:43–4.
Sheldrick JH, Ng C, Austin DJ, Rosenthal AR . An analysis of referral routes and diagnostic accuracy in cases of suspected glaucoma. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 1994;1:31–9.
Strong NP . How optometrists screen for glaucoma: a survey. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1992;12:3–7.
Tuck MW, Crick RP . Screening for glaucoma: the time taken by primary examiners to conduct visual field tests in practice. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1994;14:351–4.
Crick RP, Tuck MW . How can we improve the detection of glaucoma? BMJ 1995;310:546–7.
Henson DB, Bryson H . Clinical results with the Henson-Hamblin CFS2000. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser 1987;49:233–8.
Sponsel WE, Ritch R, Stamper R, Higginbotham EJ, Anderson DR, Wilson MR, Zimmerman TJ . Prevent Blindness America visual field screening study. Am J Ophthalmol 1995;120:699–708.
Vernon SA, Henry DJ, Jones SJ . Calculating the predictive power of the Henson field screener in a population at risk of glaucomatous field loss. Br J Ophthalmol 1990;74:220–2.
Katz J, Tielsch JM, Quigley HA, Javitt J, Witt K, Sommer A . Automated suprathreshold screening for glaucoma: The Baltimore Eye Survey. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1993;34:3271–7.
Wood CM, Bosanquet RC . Limitations of direct ophthalmoscopy in screening for glaucoma. BMJ 1987;294:1587–8.
Tielsch JM, Katz J, Singh K, Quigley HA, Gottsch JD, Javitt J, Sommer A . A population-based evaluation of glaucoma screening: The Baltimore Eye Survey. Am J Epidemiol 1991;134:1102–10.
Tuck MW, Crick RP . Relative effectiveness of different modes of glaucoma screening in optometric practice. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1993;13:227–32.
Harper R, Reeves B . Screening for primary open-angle glaucoma: a review. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1995;15(Suppl 2):S27–S34.
Vernon SA, Henry DJ, Cater L, Jones SJ . Screening for glaucoma in the community by non-ophthalmologically trained staff using semi-automated equipment. Eye 1990;4:89–97.
Tuck MW, Crick RP . Efficiency of referral for suspected glaucoma. BMJ 1991;302:998–1000.
Tuck M, Crick R . Optometrists' referral criteria for suspected glaucoma. Health Trends 1992;24:153–7.
Sommer A . Epidemiology as it relates to screening for glaucoma. Surv Ophthalmol 1989;33(Suppl):441–2.
Sheldrick JH, Sharp AJH . Glaucoma screening clinic in general practice: prevalence of occult disease, and resource implications. Br J Gen Pract 1994;44:561–5.
Dielemans I, Vingerling JR, Wolfs RCW, Hofman A, Grobbee DE, de Jong PTVM . The prevalence of primary open-angle glaucoma in a population-based study in the Netherlands. Ophthalmology 1994;101:1851–5.
Tuck MW, Crick RP . Use of visual field tests in glaucoma detection by optometrists in England and Wales. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1994;14:227–31.
Tuck MW . Referrals for suspected glaucoma: an International Glaucoma Association survey. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1991;11:22–6.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Newman, D., Anwar, S. & Jordan, K. Glaucoma screening by optometrists: Positive predictive value of visual field testing. Eye 12, 921–924 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.1998.239
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.1998.239
Keywords
This article is cited by
-
Underdiagnosis of glaucoma in patients with exudative age-related macular degeneration
Eye (2021)
-
Quality of referrals for glaucoma assessment: a cross-sectional survey of clinical data and outcomes
International Ophthalmology (2021)
-
Optometrists referrals for glaucoma assessment: a prospective survey of clinical data and outcomes
Eye (2010)
-
The influence of the new general ophthalmic services (GOS) contract in optometrist referrals for glaucoma in Scotland
Eye (2009)
-
Reply to Ghazawy et al
Eye (2007)