The Networked Analysis of Static Visual Field Evaluation: A Comparison between Medisoft and Humphrey Software Systems

Abstract

Aim: This study compares and contrasts the integrity of original data once imported to Medisoft from the Humphrey perimeter. We aim to analyse the correlation between reliability indices, mean deviation and pattern standard deviation. Methods: Visual field results from Humphrey automated perimetry using the 24-2 SITA-FAST strategy were imported to Medisoft. A direct comparison was made from original hard copy printouts from the Humphrey perimeter to hard copy printouts of the Medisoft version of the results. All data was compared using Bland-Altman plots and unpaired t tests. Results: A total of 50 patients (23 male, 27 female) aged 51 to 91 (mean ± SD: 73.8 ± 11.36) had their visual fields assessed using the 24-2 programme on a Humphrey perimeter (HFA; model 740). Conclusion: The findings of our study suggest that, overall, there is no clinically significant difference between the Humphrey and Medisoft software systems. However, the Humphrey results were not always reproduced identically using Medisoft software.