{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03552077062010837, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02107164358819988, 'mean_word_length': 5.319391634980988, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Perimetric Progression in Open Angle Glaucoma and the Visual Field Index (VFI)

PurposeTo evaluate the changes in the Visual Field Index (VFI) in eyes with perimetric glaucomatous progression, and to compare these against stable glaucoma patients. Patients and MethodsConsecutive patients with open angle glaucoma with a minimum of 6 reliable visual fields and 2 years of follow-up were identified. Perimetric progression was assessed by 4 masked glaucoma experts from different units, and classified into 3 categories: “definite progression,” “suspected progression,” or “no progression.” This was compared with the Glaucoma Progression Analysis (GPA) II and VFI linear regression analysis, where progression was defined as a negative slope with significance of <5%. ResultsThree hundred ninety-seven visual fields from 51 eyes of 39 patients were assessed. The mean number of visual fields was 7.8 (SD 1.1) per eye, and the mean follow-up duration was 63.7 (SD 13.4) months. The mean VFI linear regression slope showed an overall statistically significant difference (P<0.001, analysis of variance) for each category of progression. Using expert consensus opinion as the reference standard, both VFI analysis and GPA II had high specificity (0.93 and 0.90, respectively), but relatively low sensitivity (0.45 and 0.41, respectively). ConclusionsThe mean VFI regression slope in our cohort of eyes without perimetric progression showed a statistically significant difference compared with those with suspected and definite progression. VFI analysis and GPA II both had similarly high specificity but low sensitivity when compared with expert consensus opinion.