Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: Br J Ophthalmol. 2014 Jul 23;99(1):21–25. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305349

Table 1.

Comparison of Progression Features Between Patients with DH at Follow-Up (Group 1) and Patients with a DH at Baseline (Group 2)

Progression Group 1
(n=28)a
Group 2
(n=38)a
P valueb 95% CI
(Difference in
Proportion)
Global Progression 6 (21.4%) 15 (39.5%) 0.12 −4.5% - 40.7%
PPA Progression 2 (7.1%) 8 (21.1%) 0.17 −3.7% - 31.7%
Superior PPA Progression 1 (3.6%) 7 (18.4%) 0.13 −1.5% - 31.1%
Inferior PPA Progression 1 (3.6%) 5 (13.2%) 0.23 −5.1% - 24.3%
RNFL Progression 2 (7.1%) 6 (15.8%) 0.45 −7.5% - 24.9%
Superior RNFL Progression 1 (3.6%) 5 (13.2%) 0.23 −5.1% - 24.3%
Inferior RNFL Progression 1 (3.6%) 3 (7.9%) 0.63 −8.3% - 16.9%
Rim Progression 4 (14.3%) 12 (31.6%) 0.11 −3.5% - 38.1%
Superior Rim Progression 2 (7.1%) 7 (18.4%) 0.28 −5.7% - 28.3%
Inferior Rim Progression 3 (10.7%) 6 (15.8%) 0.72 −11.4% - 21.6%
a

Proportion of group represented as percentages of n

b

P values for Fisher's exact tests used for all categories of progression except global and rim progression. χ2 test used for global and rim progression