June 2023
Volume 64, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2023
Comparing the Usability of a Portable Virtual Reality Device with the Humphrey Visual Field Machine in Clinical Settings
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Abdullah Sarhan
    Retinalogik Inc., Calgary, Alberta, Canada
  • Kara Legault
    Dr. A. Crichton and Dr. B. Ford Clinic, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
  • Emi Sanders
    Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Surgery, University of Calgary Cumming School of Medicine, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
  • Andrew C Crichton
    Ophthalmology, University of Calgary Cumming School of Medicine, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Abdullah Sarhan Retinalogik Inc., Code I (Personal Financial Interest); Kara Legault None; Emi Sanders None; Andrew Crichton None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2023, Vol.64, 5001. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Abdullah Sarhan, Kara Legault, Emi Sanders, Andrew C Crichton; Comparing the Usability of a Portable Virtual Reality Device with the Humphrey Visual Field Machine in Clinical Settings. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2023;64(8):5001.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Purpose : Standard automated perimetry tests have been the gold standard for evaluating a patient's visual field. However, these machines face limitations including portability and ease of use. Such limitations affect the performance of the patients when performing such exam and can and lead unrelaible results. With the current advancements in the field of Virtual Reality, it is possible to do the same exam on portable and more engaging devices. In this study, we measured the adoption by patients of Virtual Reality headsets for performing visual field exams and compared their experience to the current gold standard.

Methods : Participants were recruited during their visit to the clinic by an onsite technician and informed consent was obtained. Participants then perform a visual field exam using the 30-2 grid through the Humphrey Visual Field (HVF) machine and the virtual reality device. Following the completion of both exams for both eyes, participants are then asked to fill out a survey about their experience and asked if they have any feedback.

Results : 15 participants (30 eyes) were enrolled, with a mean age 57 years± 24, 60% were Male, 80% had previously completed HVFs more than twice in the past, and 80% had not used a virtual reality headset before. 86.6% of participants agreed that VR was more comfortable than the HFA machine, while the rest did not comment but the technician felt those participants were more comfortable using the device over the HVF. 93.3% of the participants felt more confident using the Virtual reality platform over using the HFA machine. Participants enjoyed the portability of the VR technology along with the ease of use. Those features helped participants focus and better perform on the test, leading to a better quality of results.

Conclusions : Visual Field testing through VR headsets yielded great results in terms of adoption among patients. Participants enjoyed the technology over the HVF machine due to its portability and the comfort it provides and hence leading to a better patient experience. Such experience would help patients to better perform the exam and obtain reliable results. Further studies need to be performed targeting populations with diverse backgrounds to prove the adoption of such technology by those populations.

This abstract was presented at the 2023 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in New Orleans, LA, April 23-27, 2023.


This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.