Clinical report: Virtual reality enables comparable contrast sensitivity measurements to in-office testing (pilot study).

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Optometry and Vision Science Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-16 DOI:10.1097/OPX.0000000000002107
Christopher P Cheng, Randal A Serafini, Margarita Labkovich, Andrew J Warburton, Vicente Navarro, Neha Shaik, Harsha Reddy, James G Chelnis
{"title":"Clinical report: Virtual reality enables comparable contrast sensitivity measurements to in-office testing (pilot study).","authors":"Christopher P Cheng, Randal A Serafini, Margarita Labkovich, Andrew J Warburton, Vicente Navarro, Neha Shaik, Harsha Reddy, James G Chelnis","doi":"10.1097/OPX.0000000000002107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Significance: </strong>Vision health disparities largely stem from inaccessibility to vision specialists. To improve patient access to vision tests and to expedite clinical workflows, it is important to assess the viability of virtual reality (VR) as a modality for evaluating contrast sensitivity.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to assess the validity of a VR version of the Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity test by comparing its results with those of the corresponding in-office test.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-eight participants (mean ± standard deviation age, 37.3 ± 20.5 years) with corrected vision were recruited for testing on a voluntary basis with randomized administration of the in-office test followed by the VR analog or vice versa. Nineteen participants took each test twice to assess test-retest consistency in each modality. Virtual reality tests were conducted on a commercial Pico Neo Eye 2 VR headset, which has a 4K screen resolution. The environment for both tests was controlled by the participant for location and lighting.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Similar sensitivity scores were obtained between testing modalities in both the right (n = 28 participants; Wilcoxon match-paired signed rank [SR], p=0.7) and left eyes (n = 28 participants; Wilcoxon match-paired SR, p=0.7). In addition, similar test-retest scores were found for VR (n = 19 participants; Wilcoxon match-paired SR, p=1.0) or in-office (n = 19 participants; Wilcoxon match-paired SR, p=1.0) tests. Virtual reality Pelli-Robson results correlated well with in-office test results in variably diseased participants (n = 14 eyes from 7 participants, R2 = 0.93, p<0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this pilot trial, we demonstrated that VR Pelli-Robson measurements of corrected vision align with those of in-office modalities, suggesting that this may be a reliable method of implementing this test in a more interactive and accessible manner.</p>","PeriodicalId":19649,"journal":{"name":"Optometry and Vision Science","volume":"101 2","pages":"124-128"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10901448/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Optometry and Vision Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0000000000002107","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Significance: Vision health disparities largely stem from inaccessibility to vision specialists. To improve patient access to vision tests and to expedite clinical workflows, it is important to assess the viability of virtual reality (VR) as a modality for evaluating contrast sensitivity.

Purpose: This study aimed to assess the validity of a VR version of the Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity test by comparing its results with those of the corresponding in-office test.

Methods: Twenty-eight participants (mean ± standard deviation age, 37.3 ± 20.5 years) with corrected vision were recruited for testing on a voluntary basis with randomized administration of the in-office test followed by the VR analog or vice versa. Nineteen participants took each test twice to assess test-retest consistency in each modality. Virtual reality tests were conducted on a commercial Pico Neo Eye 2 VR headset, which has a 4K screen resolution. The environment for both tests was controlled by the participant for location and lighting.

Results: Similar sensitivity scores were obtained between testing modalities in both the right (n = 28 participants; Wilcoxon match-paired signed rank [SR], p=0.7) and left eyes (n = 28 participants; Wilcoxon match-paired SR, p=0.7). In addition, similar test-retest scores were found for VR (n = 19 participants; Wilcoxon match-paired SR, p=1.0) or in-office (n = 19 participants; Wilcoxon match-paired SR, p=1.0) tests. Virtual reality Pelli-Robson results correlated well with in-office test results in variably diseased participants (n = 14 eyes from 7 participants, R2 = 0.93, p<0.0001).

Conclusions: In this pilot trial, we demonstrated that VR Pelli-Robson measurements of corrected vision align with those of in-office modalities, suggesting that this may be a reliable method of implementing this test in a more interactive and accessible manner.

临床报告:虚拟现实技术可实现与诊室测试相媲美的对比敏感度测量(试点研究)。
意义重大:视力健康方面的差异主要源于无法获得视力专家的服务。为了改善患者接受视力测试的机会并加快临床工作流程,有必要评估虚拟现实(VR)作为对比敏感度评估方式的可行性。目的:本研究旨在通过比较 VR 版佩利-罗布森对比敏感度测试与相应的诊室测试结果,评估 VR 版佩利-罗布森对比敏感度测试的有效性:在自愿的基础上,招募了 28 名视力矫正的参与者(平均年龄为 37.3±20.5 岁,标准差为 37.3±20.5 岁)进行测试。19名参与者每次测试两次,以评估每种测试模式的重复测试一致性。虚拟现实测试是在具有 4K 屏幕分辨率的商用 Pico Neo Eye 2 VR 头显上进行的。两次测试的环境均由参与者控制位置和光线:右眼(n = 28 名参与者;Wilcoxon 匹配配对符号等级[SR],p=0.7)和左眼(n = 28 名参与者;Wilcoxon 匹配配对符号等级[SR],p=0.7)两种测试模式的灵敏度得分相似。此外,虚拟现实(n = 19 名参与者;Wilcoxon 匹配配对 SR,p=1.0)或诊室内(n = 19 名参与者;Wilcoxon 匹配配对 SR,p=1.0)测试的重复测试得分相似。虚拟现实的佩利-罗布森结果与不同疾病参与者的诊室测试结果有很好的相关性(n = 7 名参与者的 14 只眼睛,R2 = 0.93,p 结论:在这项试点试验中,我们证明了虚拟现实佩利-罗布森矫正视力测量结果与诊室模式的测量结果一致,这表明这可能是一种可靠的方法,能以更具互动性和更方便的方式实施这项测试。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Optometry and Vision Science
Optometry and Vision Science 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
7.10%
发文量
210
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Optometry and Vision Science is the monthly peer-reviewed scientific publication of the American Academy of Optometry, publishing original research since 1924. Optometry and Vision Science is an internationally recognized source for education and information on current discoveries in optometry, physiological optics, vision science, and related fields. The journal considers original contributions that advance clinical practice, vision science, and public health. Authors should remember that the journal reaches readers worldwide and their submissions should be relevant and of interest to a broad audience. Topical priorities include, but are not limited to: clinical and laboratory research, evidence-based reviews, contact lenses, ocular growth and refractive error development, eye movements, visual function and perception, biology of the eye and ocular disease, epidemiology and public health, biomedical optics and instrumentation, novel and important clinical observations and treatments, and optometric education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信