Text Size

Comparison of Critical Flicker Fusion Versus Automated Visual Fields in the Detection of Early Glaucoma

This study has been completed.
Sponsor:
Collaborator:
Nassau University Medical Center
Information provided by:
North Shore Long Island Jewish Health System
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT01076114
First received: February 24, 2010
Last updated: March 14, 2011
Last verified: March 2011
History of Changes

February 24, 2010
March 14, 2011
February 2010
February 2011   (final data collection date for primary outcome measure)
Difference of mean deviation of glaucoma suspects from controls between critical flicker fusion and automated visual fields. [ Time Frame: 1 visit (1 day) ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
Same as current
Complete list of historical versions of study NCT01076114 on ClinicalTrials.gov Archive Site
Not Provided
Not Provided
Not Provided
Not Provided
 
Comparison of Critical Flicker Fusion Versus Automated Visual Fields in the Detection of Early Glaucoma
Comparison of Critical Flicker Fusion vs. Automated Visual Fields in the Detection of Early Glaucoma

The purpose of this study is to evaluate if critical flicker fusion is a more reliable method for detection of early glaucoma compared to automated visual fields in comparison to subjects without evidence of glaucoma or optic nerve disease.

Our hypothesis is that critical flicker fusion (CFF) is a more reliable method for detection of early glaucoma compared to automated visual fields in comparison to subjects without evidence of glaucoma or optic nerve disease. We aim to evaluate the structure of the optic nerve and compare it to results of visual fields and CFF. The CFF will also be correlated with intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements to observe if it may be more closely related than visual fields. This may become an additional tool to detect glaucoma in those with unreliable visual fields or who are unable to perform a visual field from physical or mental limitations.
Observational
Observational Model: Cohort
Time Perspective: Prospective
Not Provided
Not Provided
Probability Sample

Subjects will be selected from routine clinic patients seen at the Eye Center at Nassau University Medical Center, in East Meadow, NY.
Glaucoma
Not Provided
  • Control
    Patients with no evidence of glaucoma or as a suspect with normal intraocular pressure, normal cup to disc ratio with no other ocular pathology and a normal ophthalmic exam.
  • Glaucoma Suspect
    Patients with abnormal cup to disc ratio or increased intraocular pressure (>21mm/Hg) with an otherwise normal ophthalmic exam.

*   Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number) in Medline.
 
Completed
58
February 2011
February 2011   (final data collection date for primary outcome measure)

Inclusion:

  • Glaucoma Suspects:
  • Abnormal optic disc appearance with increased cup to disc ratio, or
  • Increased intraocular pressure >21 in either eye
  • Control Subjects:
  • Normal appearing optic discs
  • Normal intraocular pressure (<21)

Exclusion:

  • Other ocular pathology
  • History of seizures or epilepsy
Both
18 Years and older
Yes
Contact information is only displayed when the study is recruiting subjects
United States
 
NCT01076114
09-320
Yes
Colin Scott, MD, Nassau University Medical Center
North Shore Long Island Jewish Health System
Nassau University Medical Center
Principal Investigator: Colin Scott, MD Nassau University Medical Center
North Shore Long Island Jewish Health System
March 2011

ICMJE     Data element required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Health Organization ICTRP