This prospective longitudinal study compared the 10-2 and 24-2 Humphrey Field Analyzer tests for detecting central visual field progression in 96 patients with early open-angle glaucoma and 56 healthy controls, examined every 4 months for a median of ~4.5–4.7 years (≥5 test pairs each).
Global and quadrant MD slope AUCs were not significantly different between the two tests (P=0.25 and P>0.11, respectively). At 90% specificity, only 53% of progressors were identified by both tests. The 10-2 showed significantly higher AUCs than the 24-2 only for pointwise slope cut-offs ≤ −1.25 dB/year, and patients detected solely by 10-2 had worse baseline 10-2 (but not 24-2) MD.
- Single-eye analysis per participant limits generalizability. - Study enrolled only patients with **early** visual field damage, so findings may not apply to moderate or advanced glaucoma. - The 53% overlap at 90% specificity suggests substantial variability in progression detection, but the clinical consequences of non-overlapping classifications were not evaluated.
For most glaucoma patients, the 10-2 test adds little over the 24-2 for tracking central field progression globally or by quadrant. Reserve routine 10-2 testing for patients who already have selectively worse central field loss on 10-2 at baseline and are at risk for faster progression (pointwise decline ≤ −1.25 dB/year).
Explore related topics
