Table 4.

A. Risk estimates for the association between the IPL thickness decrease and visual field worsening
Parameters	Odds Ratio	95% Confidence Interval	Significance (P)
Age	1.03	0.75–1.31	0.35
Baseline RNFL thickness	0.98	0.96–1.00	0.16
Baseline RGCL thickness	0.97	0.95–0.99	0.18
Baseline IPL thickness	0.99	0.97–1.00	0.68
Baseline visual field scores	0.99	0.96–1.02	0.59
RNFL thickness change	0.95	0.93–0.96	0.32
RGCL thickness change	0.85	0.82–0.87	0.29
B. Risk estimates for the association between the IPL density decrease and visual field worsening
Parameters	Odds Ratio	95% Confidence Interval	Significance (P)
Age	0.66	0.55–0.76	0.25
Baseline RNFL thickness	1.02	0.99–1.04	0.12
Baseline RGCL thickness	1.01	0.98–1.03	0.41
Baseline IPL thickness	0.99	0.96–1.02	0.66
Baseline visual field scores	1.01	0.98–1.04	0.58
RNFL thickness change	0.88	0.81–0.96	0.49
RGCL thickness change	0.63	0.52–0.74	0.48

To analyze the impacts of multiple variables on the association of IPL alterations with visual field worsening, odds ratios were calculated using the GEE multivariate logistic model. The significant association between decreasing IPL thickness/density and worsening of 10–2 visual field scores at corresponding test locations were independent from the patients’ age, the baseline thickness of RNFL, RGCL, or IPL, the baseline visual field scores, or the change in RNFL or RGCL thicknesses (P>0.05). Odds ratio is given for a 1-unit change.