ArticleJournal of current glaucoma practice
Comparison of the Real-world Performance of Henson 9000 Perimeter and Humphrey Field Analyzer in Glaucoma Patients.
Article in Journal of current glaucoma practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare real-world outcomes of Henson 9000 perimeter and Humphrey field analyzer (HFA) in glaucoma patients. Materials and methods: This retrospective study recruited patients diagnosed with glaucoma who underwent Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm (SITA) Standard perimetry (HFA, Carl Zeiss Meditec), followed by Zippy Adaptive Threshold Algorithm (ZATA) Standard perimetry (Henson 9000, Topcon Healthcare). Test durations, global indices, and reliability indices were compared. A subgroup analysis was done for patients classed as early [mean deviation (MD) ≥ -6 dB] and moderate-severe (MD < -6 dB) glaucoma. Fatigue-adjusted subgroup analysis was done, including right eyes only. Results: 76 eyes of 44 patients were included. Henson 9000 results were within normal reliability limits, although they showed higher false positives (FP) (by 6.79%; Conclusion: Outcomes with the Henson 9000 were reliable, with measured global indices strongly correlated with HFA results. In early glaucoma, outcomes were comparable to HFA with shorter tests, suggesting the potential of the Henson 9000 as a screening tool for early glaucoma. How to cite this article: Poli M. Comparison of the Real-world Performance of Henson 9000 Perimeter and Humphrey Field Analyzer in Glaucoma Patients. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 2025;19(1):55-63.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.