Glaucoma Treatment
Glaucoma Disease » Glaucoma Treatment » Visual Fields Test

Visual Fields Test

Question:

I’m wondering if the post below actually made it to the server.  I posted on 21 October, but there’s been no replies.  I’ve had problems with posting to this ng and another, so… David "David" <davidbenjatnogodotcom> wrote in message

news:X5Gdnf4YdbFDegiiRVn-hg@comcast.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Hi All, > I had a visual fields test today at wills.  It seemed both worse and > different from one I had done on 12 Sep 2002.  I had a trab done on 5 Feb > 2003, and my pressure is still about five.  I didn’t see my doctor today, > but my test seemed worse to both myself (I’m not a doctor and don’t play one > on TV) and the technician (also, not a doctor.)  The tech explained to me > the black part is where I didn’t see any of the lights, and the white and > gray areas are where I saw some/most of the lights.  Comparing it to the > last fields test I had, the white/gray areas were much smaller.  There was > also an area on the last test that was black, but on today’s test, the area > was gray.  I was stunned, but not surprised by the side-by-side comparison. > My question is this: Once I have blood injected into my eye to get the > pressure to rise (hopefully, just a couple of points,) will my visual fields > return close to what they were at the time of my last fields test? > Thanks for any info! > David > — > ___________________________________ > "What cannot be cured must be endured." >                      Edmund Spenser  1552-1599

Response:

I had the same experience!  The new device is MUCH faster and quieter. The tech mentioned something about it being more tolerant, or adaptive, to "cockpit errors". – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -joyh…@aol.comNOSPAM (JOYHTON) wrote: >Responding to the fatigue issue during visual field tests, my ophthalmologist >recently got a new machine.  It’s much faster, not as noisy as his old one, and >I am not so stressed by it.  I’ve been doing this test for years, and my last >one was a revelation about how advanced equipment can make this test much >easier on the eyes as well as on the whole person. >Joyce

Response:

"H Glazer" <hmg…@worldnet.att.net> wrote in news:yc8F8.21199$D41.447668@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net: <snip> – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> Yes, I see what you mean. I read somewhere online that the second >> eye > tested >> can have worse results due to fatigue. Maybe next time I could >> start with the left eye. >> eh > That aspect of the visual field test really ticks me off. You’d > think that ophthalmologists would wise up and start giving patients > a significant breather between eyes. Why should they have to look > for a trend — basically guesswork — when they could get accurate > results by letting the patient "recharge"? The cynic in me says > "Follow the money. Managed care means doctors have to herd patients > in and out as quickly as possible." I hope that’s not the case. > Howard

The techs who do my visual fields *ALWAYS* tell me that I can stop anytime and as many times as I need during the test in order to take a break.  I usually just fly through it to get it over with. I don’t know how the second eye can get more fatigued than the first eye since it’s basically not doing anything while the first eye is being tested??? Sherry

Response:

Thank you HONG for that info –maybe it is best I turn off my signature with tweety?

Response:

Responding to the fatigue issue during visual field tests, my ophthalmologist recently got a new machine.  It’s much faster, not as noisy as his old one, and I am not so stressed by it.  I’ve been doing this test for years, and my last one was a revelation about how advanced equipment can make this test much easier on the eyes as well as on the whole person. Joyce

Response:

Andy, I’ve had a few different kinds of field tests, and one thing they all had in common was that they were frustrating in just the way you described.  They start off giving you the easy stuff (bright lights) and gradually work their way to the stuff you can barely see (dimmest of dim lights).   I believe that’s because they’re trying to ascertain precisely how dim the light can be and you still see it.  It’s very frustrating — no matter how dim the spot you can see, the machine can still make it a little dimmer, until it reaches the point where you can’t see it.     I’m no doctor, just a longtime patient, and I’ve gone through a lot of medical procedures, including neurosurgery.  But I hate that visual field test — and I have to take it again next month.      My advice to you is stop trying to psych out the test and just suffer through it as good-naturedly as possible.      Best of luck to you,      Don Singleton      P.S.  Your pressure doesn’t sound the least bit alarming — 21 is generally considered the normal high limit, and mine were 28 and 36 when I was diagnosed.  So consider yourself lucky! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Andreas Greulich wrote: > Hi, > I’m new to this list as I was only recently diagnosed high IOP > (22mmHg, I’m 36 years old and short-sighted by -8 diop, plus my mother > has high IOP as well), so the doctor made a visual fields test and > found out it was still fine (also he put me on Xalatan). I don’t have > a printout, but will probably ask for it next time (well, I’m curious > :-) . Still, I was confused by the test itself and first thought I must > have gotten a terrible result – I guess I was insufficiently prepared > to it. For example, I wasn’t told that not every beep is followed by a > flash, so one or two fals positives resulted, before I "found out" how > it worked. > What confused me though was the steady reduction of the > flash-intensity over the course of the test. It was not the case, as I > would have expected, that bright and dull flashes were shown randomly; > of course they were mixed a bit, but the tendency was from bright to > dull flashes. Towards the end of the test, I could hardly see any > flashes (if any were shown, but 5 or 6 beeps without flashes at the > end of the test lie a bit out of a statistical range I guess :-) , > hence I first assumed a terrible result, which was quite frustrating – > but it seems I was wrong. Now I’m wondering if the test just has a > "fixed" end, or if it just decreases brightness until nothing is seen > anymore, a point that any person will reach sooner or later – so > anybody would miss the last 5 or 6 flashes of the test, beacsue it is > "defined" this way. Or should a "normal" patient see flashes up to the > very end of the test? > Thanks anyway for the informative link plus all informations on this > list! >                         Andy > "No Spam" <nos…@nospam.com> wrote in message <news:bnqccn$7kv$1@mawar.singnet.com.sg>… > > "David" <davidbenjatnogodotcom> wrote in message > > news:n8WdndSpONBaFj2iRVn-vg@comcast.com… > > > I’m wondering if the post below actually made it to the server.  I posted > >  on > > > 21 October, but there’s been no replies.  I’ve had problems with posting > >  to > > > this ng and another, so… > > > David > > > "David" <davidbenjatnogodotcom> wrote in message > > > news:X5Gdnf4YdbFDegiiRVn-hg@comcast.com… > > > > Hi All, > > > > I had a visual fields test today at wills.  It seemed both worse and > > > > different from one I had done on 12 Sep 2002.  I had a trab done on 5 > >  Feb > > > > 2003, and my pressure is still about five.  I didn’t see my doctor > >  today, > > > > but my test seemed worse to both myself (I’m not a doctor and don’t play > >  one > > > > on TV) and the technician (also, not a doctor.)  The tech explained to > >  me > > > > the black part is where I didn’t see any of the lights, and the white > >  and > > > > gray areas are where I saw some/most of the lights.  Comparing it to the > > > > last fields test I had, the white/gray areas were much smaller.  There > >  was > > > > also an area on the last test that was black, but on today’s test, the > >  area > > > > was gray.  I was stunned, but not surprised by the side-by-side > >  comparison. > > > > My question is this: Once I have blood injected into my eye to get the > > > > pressure to rise (hopefully, just a couple of points,) will my visual > >  fields > > > > return close to what they were at the time of my last fields test? > > > > Thanks for any info! > > > > David > > Information on how to inteprete the visual field test results, factors > > affecting the accuracy of the test, and other information pertaining to > > glaucoma can be found at: > > http://wills-glaucoma.org/index.htm > > Good luck. > > Sun Chong Hong

Response:

"Paying better attention" is probably part of it. I have had varying test results because of this, especially when you are half way through the second eye being tested. My Dr realizes this and looks mainly for a trend after a series of tests have been performed. "Ellsworth Hall" <eh…@bcpl.net> wrote in message

news:_HhC8.1459$u_3.70942@news.abs.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Hi all, > I’ve been taking drops for 8 1/2 years now ever since my pressure jumped > from 24 to 39 (I’m 44 years old). So far no optic nerve damage and the drops > keep my pressure in the low 20s. I’ve been told my iris pigment flakes off > and makes my aqueous humor more viscous. > I just took my visual fields test today (what fun!) and my doctor said my > right eye was normal and left eye was borderline, although he said I had > tested better with the left eye than the last time (paying better > attention?). Wondering what he meant by borderline (guess I’ll have to ask) > and why it would be that way if I have no apparent nerve damage. I have no > problems seeing peripherally as far as I can tell. > Any comments? >  TIA. > -eh

— Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.360 / Virus Database: 199 – Release Date: 5/7/02

Response:

"olfart" <olfar…@excite.com> wrote in message

news:abcajd$gkru5$1@ID-34582.news.dfncis.de… > "Paying better attention" is probably part of it. I have had varying test > results because of this, especially when you are half way through the second > eye being tested. My Dr realizes this and looks mainly for a trend after a > series of tests have been performed.

Yes, I see what you mean. I read somewhere online that the second eye tested can have worse results due to fatigue. Maybe next time I could start with the left eye. eh

Response:

Iwould bet my BP goes sky High during the pauses on the IOP test ; )

Response:

"David" <davidbenjatnogodotcom> wrote in message

news:n8WdndSpONBaFj2iRVn-vg@comcast.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I’m wondering if the post below actually made it to the server.  I posted on > 21 October, but there’s been no replies.  I’ve had problems with posting to > this ng and another, so… > David > "David" <davidbenjatnogodotcom> wrote in message > news:X5Gdnf4YdbFDegiiRVn-hg@comcast.com… > > Hi All, > > I had a visual fields test today at wills.  It seemed both worse and > > different from one I had done on 12 Sep 2002.  I had a trab done on 5 Feb > > 2003, and my pressure is still about five.  I didn’t see my doctor today, > > but my test seemed worse to both myself (I’m not a doctor and don’t play > one > > on TV) and the technician (also, not a doctor.)  The tech explained to me > > the black part is where I didn’t see any of the lights, and the white and > > gray areas are where I saw some/most of the lights.  Comparing it to the > > last fields test I had, the white/gray areas were much smaller.  There was > > also an area on the last test that was black, but on today’s test, the > area > > was gray.  I was stunned, but not surprised by the side-by-side > comparison. > > My question is this: Once I have blood injected into my eye to get the > > pressure to rise (hopefully, just a couple of points,) will my visual > fields > > return close to what they were at the time of my last fields test? > > Thanks for any info! > > David

Information on how to inteprete the visual field test results, factors affecting the accuracy of the test, and other information pertaining to glaucoma can be found at: http://wills-glaucoma.org/index.htm Good luck. Sun Chong Hong

Response:

Hi all, I’ve been taking drops for 8 1/2 years now ever since my pressure jumped from 24 to 39 (I’m 44 years old). So far no optic nerve damage and the drops keep my pressure in the low 20s. I’ve been told my iris pigment flakes off and makes my aqueous humor more viscous. I just took my visual fields test today (what fun!) and my doctor said my right eye was normal and left eye was borderline, although he said I had tested better with the left eye than the last time (paying better attention?). Wondering what he meant by borderline (guess I’ll have to ask) and why it would be that way if I have no apparent nerve damage. I have no problems seeing peripherally as far as I can tell. Any comments?  TIA. -eh

Response:

Re: Visual Fields Test   Group: alt.support.glaucoma Date: Thu, May 9, 2002, 7:53am From: eh…@bcpl.net (Ellsworth

Related Posts

Write a comment