Validation of a Head-mounted Virtual Reality Visual Field Screening Device

Précis: The C3 fields analyzer (CFA) is a moderately reliable perimeter preferred by patients to standard perimetry. While it does not approximate the gold standard, it was sensitive and specific for clinically defined glaucoma (area under the receiving operator characteristic curve=0.77 to 0.86). Purpose: Testing the visual field is a vital sign for diagnosing and managing glaucoma. The current gold standard, the Humphrey visual field analyzer (HFA), is large, expensive and can be uncomfortable for some patients. The current study investigated the CFA, a virtual reality head-mounted visual field testing device, as a possible subjective field test for glaucoma screening and eventually glaucoma monitoring. Patients and Methods: The CFA presented stimuli in the same 54 positions as the HFA 24-2 SITA Standard test using a suprathreshold algorithm approximating an 18 dB deficit. A total of 157 patients (both controls and glaucoma patients) at the Aravind Eye Hospital, Pondicherry, India, were tested with both devices. Results: The number of stimuli missed on the CFA correlated with HFA mean deviation (r=0.62, P<0.001), and with pattern standard deviation (r=0.36, P<0.001). The area under the receiving operator characteristic curve was 0.77±0.06 for mild glaucoma (HFA mean deviation ≥−6 dB) and 0.86±0.04 for moderate-advanced glaucoma (HFA mean deviation <−6 dB). Patients with an 18 dB or worse deficit at a point in the visual field on the HFA failed to see the CFA stimulus at the same position 38% of the time. Conclusions: While the CFA did not reliably identify deficits that matched the HFA, it was moderately effective at identifying glaucoma subjects. Further refinements to the device will be required to improve point by point testing performance and screening performance.

[1]  Richard A. Russell,et al.  Are practical recommendations practiced? A national multi-centre cross-sectional study on frequency of visual field testing in glaucoma , 2013, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[2]  Remo Susanna Jr,et al.  Staging glaucoma patient: why and how? , 2009 .

[3]  Brian A. Francis,et al.  Testing of Visual Field with Virtual Reality Goggles in Manual and Visual Grasp Modes , 2014, BioMed research international.

[4]  C. Johnson,et al.  Response properties of normal observers and patients during automated perimetry. , 1989, Archives of ophthalmology.

[5]  S P Azen,et al.  Correlation between static automated and scanning laser entoptic perimetry in normal subjects and glaucoma patients. , 2000, Ophthalmology.

[6]  M. Moster,et al.  Use of a portable head mounted perimetry system to assess bedside visual fields , 2000, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[7]  Chris A Johnson,et al.  Performance of an iPad Application to Detect Moderate and Advanced Visual Field Loss in Nepal. , 2017, American journal of ophthalmology.

[8]  Donald L Budenz,et al.  Prevalence of glaucoma in an urban West African population: the Tema Eye Survey. , 2011, JAMA ophthalmology.

[9]  A. Jindal,et al.  Development and validation of a new glaucoma screening test using temporally modulated flicker , 2018, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[10]  D. Shin,et al.  Analysis of reliability indices from Humphrey visual field tests in an urban glaucoma population. , 1997, Ophthalmology.

[11]  T. Wong,et al.  Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2014, Ophthalmology.

[12]  Algis J. Vingrys,et al.  Validation of a Tablet as a Tangent Perimeter , 2016, Translational vision science & technology.

[13]  H. Rootzén,et al.  A new generation of algorithms for computerized threshold perimetry, SITA. , 2009, Acta ophthalmologica Scandinavica.

[14]  Frequency doubling technology perimetry for the detection of glaucomatous visual field loss. , 2000, American journal of ophthalmology.

[15]  Alan L Robin,et al.  Glaucoma in a rural population of southern India: the Aravind comprehensive eye survey. , 2003, Ophthalmology.

[16]  Tien Yin Wong,et al.  Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Visual Features of Undiagnosed Glaucoma: The Singapore Epidemiology of Eye Diseases Study. , 2015, JAMA ophthalmology.