International Perimetric Society

About IPS
Joining IPS
Membership List
Site Map

Minutes of the IPS Business Meeting, June 7, 1996

horizontal rule

Maratime Congress Center
Würzburg, Germany
June 4, 1996

The minutes of the business and board meetings of the Washington, D.C. IPS symposium were unanimously approved.

Dr. Wall gave the Secretary's report. The Society now numbers 237 active members, an apparent loss of 64 members since the Kyoto meeting two years ago; Drs. Dannheim and Mills stated there may have been an error with the last count. North America has 61 (26%), Japan 63 (27%), Europe 100 (42%) and 5% from other continents. The Washington D.C. proceedings were on time and on budget. The office of the secretariat had operating expenses of $1875.85 for the past two years - mostly for secretarial assistance, faxes and mailings.

The program committee met in Frankfurt Sunday, April 14, consisting of Drs. Dannheim, Wild and Weber. 114 abstracts were received (108 for the 1994 Washington, D.C. meeting), most within one week of the abstract deadline. Seven were rejected (6% versus 15% in Washington, D.C. versus 9% in Kyoto), 107 were accepted, 55 as read papers and 52 as posters; one was withdrawn after acceptance. Fifteen percent were from Japan, 20% from North America, and 61% from Europe. There was 1 abstract from Argentina 1, from the P.R. of China and one from Russia. The committee decided to have topics for each session with oral presentations mixed with posters.

The program committee had difficulty deciding among 8 applicants for IPS junior investigator grants, so decided to allocate the $4000 for 4 recipients and waiver of registration fee.

An editorial committee for the Washington, D.C. proceedings composed of board members did an outstanding job of reviewing the manuscripts; 80 manuscripts were accepted and 4 rejected. Kugler Publications has offered an identical contract to the previous one; we have accepted it.

Dr. Dannheim gave the Treasurer's report. The expenses of the IPS from 1994 - 1996 were 61,203,73 DM. Income was 76,303,15 DM. This left a balance of 80,488,24 DM. There was a loss from financing the last Proceedings balanced by a refund. Membership fees were less than the Proceedings fees but all membership fees were not included as about 2/3 of members have not paid their annual dues. Dr. Dannheim suggested the membership fee remain the same.

Dr. Heijl then called for reports of group and task committee chairpersons:

Group 1. Standards--Dr. Wild

We have been interacting with the ISO Standard Committee. Three meetings of this group were attended by Fritz Dannheim also as delegate of German ophthalmological society. The ISO standard was approved. Discussions with Charles Campbell revealed many countries were not happy with definition of suprathreshold permetry. Dr Mills complimented the group on the changes made to the ISO document.

The standards group to produce the Second Codicil met in Cologne in the April of 1995, in Cologne, Germany. The group that met for four days was composed of Dr.'s Weber, Wild, Wall, Zulauf, Flanagan, and Dannheim. Initially the group revised the ISO standard; our input was later incorporated by the ISO. Dr. Wild said there was about one week of work left to be done on the document and that he would accomplish this over the summer. He pointed out the ISO standard is a manufacturing standard. The codicil incorporates the ISO document and goes far beyond into practice of perimetry. He plans to ask a leading ophthalmology journal to publish our document.

Dr. Weber stated the board must have input into the final document but the board should not make many changes. The Board should submit comments and give arguments to John Wild. He should then circulate the document and Board members should vote for or against. For distribution of the document, Dr. Hart suggested there should be a well-defined mechanism that is voted on by the board. He said the wider the distribution the better including sending the document to members - possibly by a Web Site page. Dr. Heijl said that, as a board, we agreed with Dr. Hart's line of thinking. Dr. Mills stated when an AAO draft document is circulated, comments are made and each comment receives an answer so those voting have an idea of the discussion.

It was decided the document would be published in a journal, if possible. In addition it should be published in our Proceedings if there is no copyright conflict and posted on a Web Page if we have one. It should also be distributed directly to the members. Dr. Wild will distribute the standards document to the board. It will then be revised and circulated to board again. He will ask the journal Ophthalmology to publish it. A history of comments will be provided. Dr. Mills suggested we also distribute the final document to major manufacturers. A discussion ensued whether we should get input from manufacturers. Many pros and cons were discussed. Dr. Wild summed up the discussion suggesting we send it to manufacturers only after it is completed.

Group 3. Retina/disc--Dr. Schwartz

There was no activity in this group.

Group 4. Glaucoma--Dr. Weber

Dr. Weber reported no activity no activity in this group. Databases with information regarding visual field progression were investigated but the problem was more complex than realized. He will contact Dr. Fitzke.

Group 5.--Neuro-ophthalmology--Dr. Safran

Dr. Safran called a meeting for the end of first day of sessions to last about 1 hour. The neuro-ophthalmology approach to perimetry and common databases will be discussed.

Group 6.--Color--Dr. Hart

The only activity is in this group has been SWAP (short wavelength sensitive perimetry). Standardization of color stimuli was requested by an international organization. This will be covered in the IPS standards document. Dr. Wall suggested since there were a small number of SWAP investigators compared with a large number of those doing computer graphics perimetry research, that the charge of this group be redirected. Dr. Hart suggested the working group be called "Non-standard Perimetry Techniques" and include SWAP, motion, pattern detection and high-pass resolution perimetry. This suggestion was unanimously endorsed.

Group 7. Data Acquisition and Analysis--Dr. Chauhan

This group had no activity. The board discussed whether the group should be disbanded. It was decided this group still had an important function.

Group 8. Ergoperimetry-- Dr. Lachenmeyer

Dr. Lachenmeyer has resigned his position. The board discussed whether this group should continue. Dr. Mills pointed out it was important for outcomes research and since research regarding quality of life was timely and should be preserved. The board considered many new names and settled on "Disability Evaluation" as the new name.

Dr. Heijl called for new business.

Sites of future IPS meetings were discussed. France, Italy and Australia were suggested for the 1998 meeting. Drs.'s Zingarian and Gandolfo proposed Italy. The board received a brochure from Dr. Bechetoille about France. Dr. Wall circulated correspondence from Dr. Vingrys about Australia. The enthusiasm for Australia was tempered by the high cost of airfares for members. It was decided to leave this decision to the membership.

Dr. Heijl suggested North America for the year 2000 and cited lower costs and a desire to keep American members. The future of Imaging in the society was discussed with no recommendations in changing our procedures.

Dr. Hart suggested we communicate with membership twice a year and poll them for special interest groups. Dr. Heijl stated we should encourage meetings at other venues; Dr. Gramer disagreed. There was no enthusiasm for developing special interest groups like those at ARVO. It was suggested we have discussions during our meetings. Dr. Gramer suggested we devote the first part of our meeting to the training of technicians. Dr. Hart reminded us of the difficulties of doing this. Dr. Zulauf noted the European Glaucoma Society has a day for courses then has their scientific sessions. Dr. Weber interjected there were courses in different languages. Dr. Mills suggested we try this approach at the next meeting in Europe. Dr. Dannheim noted this would be difficult to plan because of language barriers. Dr. Chauhan stated JAHCPO subserves this function well in North America. Dr. Gramer suggested in addition, a course for practitioners. Dr. Chauhan again noted the AAO subserves this need in North America. Dr. Heijl, noted it would increase meeting attendance and is consistent with our mission of education. The vote was unanimous in favor of this idea but that this meeting would not be not mandatory and be at the discretion of the host member. If there is no educational day, it was suggested we add one half day to meeting and add several seminars spread throughout the meeting. This was approved.

The changes in meeting format were discussed. The interleaving of posters with platform presentations was thought to be a good idea.

Dr. Zulauf suggested we initiate a Goldmann lecture. However it was pointed out there already were at least two Goldmann lectures. Other stalwarts of perimetric research were suggested but it was decided not to pursue this type of lecture at this time.

Publishing of our symposia was discussed. The board favored continuing the Kugler contract.

Dr Schwartz, by letter, suggested we discuss the need for indexing in Index Medicus and electronic publishing. He suggested stronger peer review standards. Dr. Mills commented other publishers were too expensive. Dr. Heijl concluded the discussion suggesting we continue with proceedings in the present format but try to lengthen the abstracts by encouraging two page abstracts.

Initiatives towards the World Wide Web and communications by electronic mail were discussed. It was suggested the Secretary compile addresses of members that communications regularly by e-mail

Dr. Wall has investigated constructing a Web page for the society. The Ophthalmology Department at the University of Iowa is willing to supply a simple IPS home page for a nominal fee. This would probably cost the society at the most, $100 per year in internet administrative fees. A number of enhancements could be added such as a membership list with addresses, fax and phone numbers (restricted), we could showcase how perimetry is used with a simple and complicated case, a form to submit abstracts electronically could be developed, we could have a bylaw page and new member page. Meeting deadlines and news could be added as well as links to other home pages (e.g., AAO). We could distribute Dr. Hart's IPS proceedings abstract search engine or it could be linked to the home page. Dr. Hart then demonstrated the IPS proceedings abstract search engine. The board liked this very much and thanked Dr. Hart for all of his efforts. Adding these more complicated features to the Web page was estimated to cost as much as $1000 in programming fees. The board voted to allow use of this much in funds.

Dr. Heijl suggested we encourage recruitment of new members. He suggested we use the ARVO book. He stated the numbers were not as important as quality and suggested a membership drive about one year before the next meeting.

The overall plan for the next meeting was discussed. Dr. Heijl proposed definitions of roles and responsibilities for the organizers along with dates and deadlines. This plan was approved by the board and is attached. The program committee for the next meeting will be Dr.'s Henson, Brusini, Gandolfo and Wall.

The board discussed nominations for available board positions

For president, Dr. Heijl nominated John Wild. The nomination was seconded by Dr. Mills. Dr. Hart nominated Fritz Dannheim; it was seconded by Dr. J. Weber. Mario Zingarian was nominated by Dr. Chauhan and was seconded by Dr. Kitazawa. Dr. Mills was suggested but he declined. A discussion of the candidates ensued. It was pointed out the previous presidents of the IPS were Dr.'s Dubois Poulson, Aulhorn, Drance and Heijl. Dr. Wild received the nomination of the board for the office of president.

Dr. Zingarian's term as vice president is expiring. Nominations were Dr. Hart by Dr. Weber, seconded by Dr. Wall. Dr. Wild nominated Dr. Heijl; this nomination was seconded by Dr. Weber. Dr. Heijl received the nomination.

For the Standards committee, Dr. Wild's term was expiring. Dr. Chauhan nominated Evanne Casson; it was seconded by Dr. Zulauf. Dr. Wall nominated Dr. Zulauf, seconded by Dr. Weber. Dr. Casson received the nomination.

For the Retina/Optic disc group, Dr Schwartz' term is expiring. Dr. Reinhard Burk received the nomination.

Dr. Hart's term in color perimetry was expiring. He was nominated by Dr. Wall (seconded by Dr. Weber) as the new chair of Non-standard Perimetric Techniques that will include color perimetry.

Dr. Lachenmeyer is retiring from the ergoperimetry group. This group has been renamed to Visual Disability Evaluation and Dr. Zulauf was nominated by Dr. Weber (seconded by Dr. Wild)

For members at large Dr.'s Zulauf and Otori are retiring. Names suggested were Dr.'s Iwase, Brusini and Sample.

horizontal rule

search this site

horizontal rule

Copyright 2002. International Perimetric Society