Comparison of the TEMPO binocular perimeter and Humphrey field analyzer

Abstract

Abstract This study compared between TEMPO, a new binocular perimeter, with the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA). Patients were tested with both TEMPO 24–2 Ambient Interactive Zippy Estimated by Sequential Testing (AIZE)-Rapid and HFA 24–2 Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA)-Fast in a randomized sequence on the same day. Using a mixed-effects model, visual field (VF) parameters and reliability indices were compared. Retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness was measured using Cirrus optical coherence tomography (OCT), and coefficient of determinations for VF and OCT parameters were calculated and compared using Akaike information criteria. 740 eyes (including 68 healthy, 262 glaucoma suspects, and 410 glaucoma) of 370 participants were evaluated. No significant differences were seen in mean deviation and visual field index between the two perimeters (P > 0.05). A stronger association between VF mean sensitivity (dB or 1/L) and circumpapillary RNFL was found for TEMPO (adjusted R2 = 0.25; Akaike information criteria [AIC] = 5235.5 for dB, and adjusted R2 = 0.29; AIC = 5200.8 for 1/L, respectively) compared to HFA (adjusted R2 = 0.22; AIC = 5263.9 for dB, and adjusted R2 = 0.22; AIC = 5262.7 for 1/L, respectively). Measurement time was faster for TEMPO compared to HFA (261 s vs. 429 s, P < 0.001). Further investigations are needed to assess the long-term monitoring potential of this binocular VF test.