Comparison of AIZE-EX and SITA-standard visual field measurements in patients with glaucoma

PURPOSE: To compare visual field test results between the AIZE-EX strategy of the imo perimeter and Humphrey field analyzer (HFA) Swedish interactive threshold algorithm (SITA)-standard in glaucoma patients. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cross-sectional study METHODS: This study included 52 eyes of 26 patients with glaucoma. Binocular testing with imo 24plus (1-2) AIZE-EX (78 test points) and HFA 30-2 SITA-Standard (76 test points) results obtained within 3 months were compared. Mean deviation (MD) and patter standard deviation (PSD) were recalculated from the 24-2 test points (54 points) and compared between devices. Agreement was assessed using cluster-robust t-test, Bland-Altman analysis, and equivalence testing using two one-sided tests (TOST); margin ±1.5 dB). RESULTS: MD was -7.89 ± 6.86 dB for AIZE-EX and -8.24 ± 7.13 dB for SITA-Standard (bias: +0.35 dB; 95% LoA: -4.04 to +4.73 dB; p = 0.342). PSD was 8.52 ± 4.15 and 8.20 ± 4.72 dB, respectively (bias: +0.32 dB; 95% LoA: -2.94 to +3.58 dB; p = 0.190). TOST confirmed equivalence for both MD (90% CI: -0.26 to +0.95 dB; p = 0.002) and PSD (90% CI: -0.09 to +0.72 dB; p < 0.001). Proportional bias was absent for MD (p = 0.405) but present for PSD (p = 0.012). Test time for both eyes was significantly shorter with AIZE-EX (7 min 39 s vs. 15 min 24 s; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: MD and PSD values were comparable between the AIZE-EX and SITA-Standard derived from 24-2 test points, demonstrating clinical equivalence. Test time was substantially shorter with the AIZE-EX despite a greater number of points, supporting its use in routine glaucoma follow-up.