Ionized metal flux fractions in high power impulse magnetron sputtering (HiPIMS) were analyzed by a combination of a retarding field analyzer and a quartz crystal microbalance (QCM).
Visual field was tested using a Humphrey Field Analyzer and the Esterman test protocol [26, 27].
Visual fields were tested with the Humphrey Field Analyzer Program 30 2 according to the Humphrey perimetry manual.
Static visual field testing (The Humphrey Field Analyzer central 30-2 testshold test; Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Oberkochen, Germany) disclosed no abnormalities.
Standard automated perimetry was performed with the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA, USA), and the 30-2 program with the SITA was used.
To compare the sensitivity of Swedish interactive threshold algorithm (SITA) strategies with the standard full threshold algorithm in the Humphrey Field Analyzer.
Mean deviation of 30-2 program in Humphrey Field Analyzer increases from -13.95 dB before treatment to -7.23 dB after treatment.
To report the correlations among Humphrey Field Analyzer 750 (HFA), high-pass resolution perimetry (HRP), and frequency-doubling technology (FDT) perimetry in glaucoma patients and ocular hypertensive patients.
To evaluate the accuracy of the visual field index (VFI) for the Humphrey Visual Field Analyzer in a population of patients with mild to moderate glaucoma.
There is an indication that these structural changes are caused by the energy of deposited species (ion distribution functions were measured by time-resolved retarding field analyzer).
