Search

Context: Various systems are available to stage glaucomatous field defects into different severity grades. Still, the preference for such systems among Indian eye care practitioners (ECPs) and the consensus between them are not explored. Purpose: To compare the clinical performance of perimetric glaucoma staging systems and to assess their preference patterns among Indian ECPs. Setting and Design: Retro-prospective cross-sectional study. Methods: Three investigators stratified 400 perimetry reports using four systems: Hodapp Anderson Parrish (HAP), enhanced Glaucoma Severity Staging (eGSS), Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS), and Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study (CIGTS). Their performance was compared in terms of agreement and association. Following this, 30 ECPs from across the country segregated a subset of reports (n = 20) into different stages based on their system of choice, and their preferences/perceptions about the available perimetry staging systems were enquired and documented. Statistical Analysis Used: Descriptive statistics, Kruskal–Wallis, Cohen's kappa, and Spearman's correlation. Results: For the consolidated severity stages, substantial agreements (K ranging from 0.61 to 0.75) were found between all the systems, except for HAP–CIGTS (K = 0.58) and AGIS–CIGTS (K = 0.51). All ECPs were aware of perimetry staging systems, and a high preference was reported for HAP (97%) due to ease of implementation and interpretation. Conclusion: Among the four staging systems, the highest agreement was found between HAP and eGSS. A majority of ECPs proposed the need for a uniform classification system across the practices for clinical comparisons and patient education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]