Abstract
Purpose :
Automated perimetry is a crucial ophthalmic evaluation tool, playing a vital role in the assessment of medical conditions with visual manifestations and tracking their progression over time. Humphrey’s visual field Analyzer (HFA) is broadly recognized as the gold standard for automated perimetry. Despite being widely trusted as a validated tool, the HFA is limited by its lack of portability, high cost, and the need for dedicated space and continuous technician monitoring. To address these limitations, virtual reality (VR) headsets have emerged as an alternative visual field-testing method. In this study, we investigate the inter-test comparability of a novel automated perimetry VR device (RetinaLogik Inc., Calgary, AB) compared to the HFA.
Methods :
This study is conducted at a single center, involving 32 eyes from 18 glaucoma suspect patients. Tests with high false-positivity rate (>15%) were excluded. Participants underwent visual field testing on two different days using both devices. Extracted data included global mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD), global mean sensitivity (MS), and pointwise sensitivity. Linear regression analysis was utilized to evaluate the MD and PSD data. Moreover, Bland-Altman plotting was used to assess the mean difference and level of agreement between the two devices.
Results :
Linear regression analysis of our data yielded a strong Pearson correlation coefficient of r=0.7677 for MD (P<0.0001), r=0.0.9065 for PSD (P<0.0001), and r=0.7947 (P<0.001) for global MS. Moreover, Bland-Altman plot analysis revealed a bias of 0.86 dB with 95% limits of agreement between -1.8 and 3.35, when comparing the MS of the VR device with HFA. Pointwise analysis was conducted separately for 24-2, 30-2, and for both grids combined. Differences in light sensitivity between both devices, averaged individually at each stimuli location, were plotted on a heatmap, and demonstrated varied between –1.62 and 4.05, with an average variation of 1.08dB.
Conclusions :
Our preliminary results suggest that the VRF100 headset is non-inferior to the gold standard HFA in terms of visual field testing in a glaucoma suspect patient population. Ongoing studies will continue to explore the efficacy of this technology across other patient populations.
This abstract was presented at the 2024 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, WA, May 5-9, 2024.