Meghan Sharma MD, MPH, Eleonore Savatovsky MD, PhD, Laura Huertas MPH, Robert O’Brien PhD, Alana Grajewski MD, Elena Bitrian MD
{"title":"使用虚拟现实头戴设备对青光眼患者进行埃斯特曼视野测试","authors":"Meghan Sharma MD, MPH, Eleonore Savatovsky MD, PhD, Laura Huertas MPH, Robert O’Brien PhD, Alana Grajewski MD, Elena Bitrian MD","doi":"10.1016/j.xops.2024.100534","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To test the use of a virtual reality visual field headset (VRVF) for implementation of the Esterman visual field (EVF) test as compared with standard automated perimetry (SAP) among people with glaucoma.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>Experimental design.</p></div><div><h3>Subjects</h3><p>Patients with mild to severe glaucoma ranging from 10 to 90 years who presented for follow-up at a glaucoma clinic in Miami, Florida were eligible.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Participants performed the EVF test on both SAP and VRVF. Five glaucoma-trained ophthalmologists were then asked to rate all anonymized SAP and RVF tests as a “pass” or “failure” based on Florida state law.</p></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><p>Point-by-point concordance between original VRVF EVF test results and SAP EVF test results was calculated using the Kappa statistic. Concordance between SAP and VRVF was secondarily assessed with a conditional logistic regression based on the pass-failure determinations by the glaucoma-trained ophthalmologists. Interrater agreement on test pass-failure determinations was also calculated. Finally, test results on SAP versus VRVF were compared based on Esterman efficiency score (EES), the number of correct points divided by the number of total points, and duration of testing.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Twenty-two subjects were included in the study with ages ranging from 14 to 78 years old. Concordance between VRVF and SAP test using point-by-point analysis was poor (<em>κ</em> = 0.332, [95% confidence intervals {CI}: 0.157, 0.506]) and somewhat increased using pass-failure determinations from ophthalmologists (<em>κ</em> = 0.657, [95% CI: 0.549, 0.751]). Ophthalmologists were more likely to agree amongst themselves on pass-failure determinations for VRVF tests (<em>κ</em> = 0.890, [95% CI: 0.726, 0.964]) than for SAP (<em>κ</em> = 0.590, [95% CI: 0.372, 0.818]); however, VRVF demonstrated significantly lower EES than SAP (median EES difference: 4.5 points, <em>P</em> = 0.021).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This pilot study is the first to assess the implementation of the EVF test using a virtual reality headset. Based on the weak overall agreement between VRVF and SAP, the current VRVF EVF test is not an acceptable determinant of driver’s licensing. However, ophthalmologists were more likely to agree amongst themselves on VRVF test reports than on SAP reports. With further testing and improvement, virtual reality may eventually become a portable and convenient method for administering the EVF test.</p></div><div><h3>Financial Disclosure(s)</h3><p>Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74363,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology science","volume":"4 5","pages":"Article 100534"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666914524000708/pdfft?md5=2af0aa73e39d0dd321a970d4d204dc75&pid=1-s2.0-S2666914524000708-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Esterman Visual Field Testing Using a Virtual Reality Headset in Glaucoma\",\"authors\":\"Meghan Sharma MD, MPH, Eleonore Savatovsky MD, PhD, Laura Huertas MPH, Robert O’Brien PhD, Alana Grajewski MD, Elena Bitrian MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.xops.2024.100534\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To test the use of a virtual reality visual field headset (VRVF) for implementation of the Esterman visual field (EVF) test as compared with standard automated perimetry (SAP) among people with glaucoma.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>Experimental design.</p></div><div><h3>Subjects</h3><p>Patients with mild to severe glaucoma ranging from 10 to 90 years who presented for follow-up at a glaucoma clinic in Miami, Florida were eligible.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Participants performed the EVF test on both SAP and VRVF. Five glaucoma-trained ophthalmologists were then asked to rate all anonymized SAP and RVF tests as a “pass” or “failure” based on Florida state law.</p></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><p>Point-by-point concordance between original VRVF EVF test results and SAP EVF test results was calculated using the Kappa statistic. Concordance between SAP and VRVF was secondarily assessed with a conditional logistic regression based on the pass-failure determinations by the glaucoma-trained ophthalmologists. Interrater agreement on test pass-failure determinations was also calculated. Finally, test results on SAP versus VRVF were compared based on Esterman efficiency score (EES), the number of correct points divided by the number of total points, and duration of testing.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Twenty-two subjects were included in the study with ages ranging from 14 to 78 years old. Concordance between VRVF and SAP test using point-by-point analysis was poor (<em>κ</em> = 0.332, [95% confidence intervals {CI}: 0.157, 0.506]) and somewhat increased using pass-failure determinations from ophthalmologists (<em>κ</em> = 0.657, [95% CI: 0.549, 0.751]). Ophthalmologists were more likely to agree amongst themselves on pass-failure determinations for VRVF tests (<em>κ</em> = 0.890, [95% CI: 0.726, 0.964]) than for SAP (<em>κ</em> = 0.590, [95% CI: 0.372, 0.818]); however, VRVF demonstrated significantly lower EES than SAP (median EES difference: 4.5 points, <em>P</em> = 0.021).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This pilot study is the first to assess the implementation of the EVF test using a virtual reality headset. Based on the weak overall agreement between VRVF and SAP, the current VRVF EVF test is not an acceptable determinant of driver’s licensing. However, ophthalmologists were more likely to agree amongst themselves on VRVF test reports than on SAP reports. With further testing and improvement, virtual reality may eventually become a portable and convenient method for administering the EVF test.</p></div><div><h3>Financial Disclosure(s)</h3><p>Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74363,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmology science\",\"volume\":\"4 5\",\"pages\":\"Article 100534\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666914524000708/pdfft?md5=2af0aa73e39d0dd321a970d4d204dc75&pid=1-s2.0-S2666914524000708-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmology science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666914524000708\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666914524000708","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的测试在青光眼患者中使用虚拟现实视野头盔(VRVF)进行埃斯特曼视野(EVF)测试与标准自动周边测量法(SAP)的比较.设计实验设计.受试者患有轻度至重度青光眼的患者,年龄从 10 岁到 90 岁不等,在佛罗里达州迈阿密市的一家青光眼诊所接受随访.方法受试者在 SAP 和 VRVF 上进行 EVF 测试。然后要求五位接受过青光眼培训的眼科医生根据佛罗里达州法律对所有匿名的 SAP 和 RVF 测试进行 "通过 "或 "失败 "评级。主要结果测量采用 Kappa 统计量计算原始 VRVF EVF 测试结果与 SAP EVF 测试结果之间的逐点一致性。SAP 和 VRVF 的一致性则根据青光眼培训眼科医生的通过-失败判定结果,通过条件逻辑回归进行二次评估。此外,还计算了测试通过-失败判定的内部一致性。最后,根据埃斯特曼效率评分(EES)、正确点数除以总点数以及测试持续时间,比较了 SAP 与 VRVF 的测试结果。采用逐点分析法进行的 VRVF 和 SAP 测试之间的一致性较差(κ = 0.332,[95% 置信区间 {CI}:0.157,0.506]),而采用眼科医生的合格-不合格判定法进行的一致性则有所提高(κ = 0.657,[95% CI:0.549,0.751])。眼科医生之间就 VRVF 检测的通过-未通过判定达成一致的可能性(κ = 0.890,[95% CI:0.726,0.964])高于 SAP(κ = 0.590,[95% CI:0.372,0.818])。结论这项试验性研究首次评估了使用虚拟现实头显实施 EVF 测试的情况。根据 VRVF 和 SAP 之间较弱的总体一致性,目前的 VRVF EVF 测试并不是一个可接受的驾驶执照决定因素。不过,眼科医生之间就 VRVF 测试报告达成一致的可能性要高于 SAP 报告。随着进一步的测试和改进,虚拟现实技术最终可能成为一种便携、方便的 EVF 测试方法。
Esterman Visual Field Testing Using a Virtual Reality Headset in Glaucoma
Purpose
To test the use of a virtual reality visual field headset (VRVF) for implementation of the Esterman visual field (EVF) test as compared with standard automated perimetry (SAP) among people with glaucoma.
Design
Experimental design.
Subjects
Patients with mild to severe glaucoma ranging from 10 to 90 years who presented for follow-up at a glaucoma clinic in Miami, Florida were eligible.
Methods
Participants performed the EVF test on both SAP and VRVF. Five glaucoma-trained ophthalmologists were then asked to rate all anonymized SAP and RVF tests as a “pass” or “failure” based on Florida state law.
Main Outcome Measures
Point-by-point concordance between original VRVF EVF test results and SAP EVF test results was calculated using the Kappa statistic. Concordance between SAP and VRVF was secondarily assessed with a conditional logistic regression based on the pass-failure determinations by the glaucoma-trained ophthalmologists. Interrater agreement on test pass-failure determinations was also calculated. Finally, test results on SAP versus VRVF were compared based on Esterman efficiency score (EES), the number of correct points divided by the number of total points, and duration of testing.
Results
Twenty-two subjects were included in the study with ages ranging from 14 to 78 years old. Concordance between VRVF and SAP test using point-by-point analysis was poor (κ = 0.332, [95% confidence intervals {CI}: 0.157, 0.506]) and somewhat increased using pass-failure determinations from ophthalmologists (κ = 0.657, [95% CI: 0.549, 0.751]). Ophthalmologists were more likely to agree amongst themselves on pass-failure determinations for VRVF tests (κ = 0.890, [95% CI: 0.726, 0.964]) than for SAP (κ = 0.590, [95% CI: 0.372, 0.818]); however, VRVF demonstrated significantly lower EES than SAP (median EES difference: 4.5 points, P = 0.021).
Conclusions
This pilot study is the first to assess the implementation of the EVF test using a virtual reality headset. Based on the weak overall agreement between VRVF and SAP, the current VRVF EVF test is not an acceptable determinant of driver’s licensing. However, ophthalmologists were more likely to agree amongst themselves on VRVF test reports than on SAP reports. With further testing and improvement, virtual reality may eventually become a portable and convenient method for administering the EVF test.
Financial Disclosure(s)
Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.