Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science Cover Image for Volume 65, Issue 7
June 2024
Volume 65, Issue 7
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2024
Virtual Reality Visual Field versus Humphrey Visual Field, A Comparative Analysis of Function and Ease of Use
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Nikhil dhall
    Ophthalmology, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States
  • Ricardo Salinas
    Ophthalmology, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States
  • Francisca Zuazo
    Ophthalmology, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States
  • Wesley Ho
    Ophthalmology, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States
  • Ansu John
    Ophthalmology, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States
  • Feng Li
    Ophthalmology, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States
  • Alex Suh
    Ophthalmology, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States
  • Ze Zhang
    Ophthalmology, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Nikhil dhall None; Ricardo Salinas None; Francisca Zuazo None; Wesley Ho None; Ansu John None; Feng Li None; Alex Suh None; Ze Zhang Alcon , Code C (Consultant/Contractor), Sight Sciences, Code C (Consultant/Contractor)
  • Footnotes
    Support  NONE
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2024, Vol.65, 4809. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Nikhil dhall, Ricardo Salinas, Francisca Zuazo, Wesley Ho, Ansu John, Feng Li, Alex Suh, Ze Zhang; Virtual Reality Visual Field versus Humphrey Visual Field, A Comparative Analysis of Function and Ease of Use. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2024;65(7):4809.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Novel devices for visual field testing in Glaucoma clinics may provide an easier testing experience. We hypothesize the Virtual Reality Visual Fields (VRVF) by Olleyes VisuALL provides similar test quality to the standard Humphrey Visual Field (HVF) with superior patient preference.

Methods : Glaucoma patients from Tulane Glaucoma Clinic with at least one reliable HVF were included in this study. The last reliable HVF within one month (Zeiss, Jena, Germany) was compared to the VRVF (Olleyes Inc., Summit, NJ). Progression was defined as clinician decision and/or event-based analysis of HVF using Anderson’s criteria. Qualitative comparisons between the VRVF and HVF were completed by two independent examiners for pattern detection.

Results : 67 eyes of 39 patients were enrolled, of whom 24 completed a device preference survey. Mean age was 70 +/- 11.3 years, 56% Male. 69% of the patients were Black, 21% White, and 10% other. Glaucoma severity ranged from ocular hypertension to severe. Progression was detected in ten patients by HVF. All patients on VRVF showed similar changes on qualitative match. False positives were significantly lower with the VRVF (4.45% VR, 11.02% HVF, P=0.012). False negatives were similar between both methods (9.38% VR, 8.85% HVF, P=0.88). Fixation losses were not measured on VRVF. Duration of testing was significantly lower with VRVF versus HVF (3.05 min VRVF, 4.15 min HVF, P=<0.0001). 76% qualitative match between the VRVF and HVF by independent observers. Mean deviation and pattern standard deviation were similar, though not statistically significant (P= 0.18 and P=0.12). 7 eyes excluded from HVF due to poor vision were found to have glaucomatous defects when trialed on VRVF. Survey results of testing preference between VRVF and HVF using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test found statistically significant preferences for VRVF in all areas of use including instruction, ease of focus, comfort, access, and user experience.

Conclusions : Virtual Reality visual field testing using the VisuALL provides comparable quantitative results to standard Humphrey visual field testing, with superior patient comfort and ease of use. While benefits to the HVF include proprietary glaucoma progression analysis and visual field indices and testing algorithms based on clinical trials, VRVF appears non-inferior to HVF in terms of reliability, accuracy, and ability to detect defects.

This abstract was presented at the 2024 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, WA, May 5-9, 2024.

×
×

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.

×