Use of Virtual Reality Simulation to Identify Vision-Related Disability in Patients With Glaucoma | Glaucoma | JAMA Ophthalmology | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 35.170.64.36. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
Virtual Reality Shopping Task to Characterize Glaucoma-Related Visual Disability

Comparison of virtual reality performance between a healthy individual (A) and a patient with glaucoma (B) in a supermarket shopping task. Participants were asked to identify 10 shopping items from a rack. In this example, the patient with glaucoma took 167.5 seconds to complete the shopping and incorrectly identified 1 item, while the healthy individual took 39.7 seconds to correctly identify 10 shopping items without misidentification. MD indicates mean deviation; VFI, visual field index.

Virtual Reality Nighttime Stair Navigation Task to Characterize Glaucoma-Related Visual Disability

Comparison of virtual reality performance between a healthy individual (A) and a patient with glaucoma (B) in the nighttime stair navigation task. Participants were asked to walk up and then down 2 flights of stairs. In this example, the healthy individual took 179.5 seconds whereas the patient with glaucoma took 465.1 seconds to complete the navigation. The numbers of collisions during the navigation were 0 and 3, respectively. MD indicates mean deviation; VFI, visual field index.

Daytime vs Nighttime Stair Navigation Task to Characterize Glaucoma-Related Visual Disability

Comparison of virtual reality performance of a patient with glaucoma in the daytime (A) and nighttime (B) stair navigation task. In this example, the patient with glaucoma took almost double the time required in daytime navigation (93.4 seconds) to complete the nighttime navigation (181.6 seconds). The number of collisions was 1 in daytime navigation and 6 in nighttime navigation. MD indicates mean deviation; VFI, visual field index.

Virtual Reality City Navigation Task to Characterize Glaucoma-Related Visual Disability

Comparison of virtual reality performance between a healthy individual (A) and a patient with glaucoma (B) in the nighttime city navigation task. The participants navigated a virtual distance of approximately 90 m in a city area modeled on Hong Kong. In this example, the healthy individual took 78.7 seconds whereas the patient with glaucoma took 167.8 seconds to complete the navigation. The numbers of collisions during the navigation were 0 and 1, respectively. MD indicates mean deviation; VFI, visual field index.

Daytime vs Nighttime City Navigation Task to Characterize Glaucoma-Related Visual Disability

Comparison of virtual reality performance of a patient with glaucoma in the daytime (A) and nighttime (B) city navigation task. In this example, the patient with glaucoma took almost double the time required in the daytime navigation (85.1 seconds) to complete the nighttime navigation (167.8 seconds). The number of collisions was 2 in the daytime navigation and 1 in the nighttime navigation. MD indicates mean deviation; VFI, visual field index.

1.
Flaxman  SR, Bourne  RRA, Resnikoff  S,  et al; Vision Loss Expert Group of the Global Burden of Disease Study.  Global causes of blindness and distance vision impairment 1990-2020: a systematic review and meta-analysis.   Lancet Glob Health. 2017;5(12):e1221-e1234. doi:10.1016/S2214-109X(17)30393-5 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Tham  YC, Li  X, Wong  TY, Quigley  HA, Aung  T, Cheng  CY.  Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis.   Ophthalmology. 2014;121(11):2081-2090. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.05.013 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Weinreb  RN, Leung  CK, Crowston  JG,  et al.  Primary open-angle glaucoma.   Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016;2:16067. doi:10.1038/nrdp.2016.67 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Haymes  SA, Leblanc  RP, Nicolela  MT, Chiasson  LA, Chauhan  BC.  Risk of falls and motor vehicle collisions in glaucoma.   Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48(3):1149-1155. doi:10.1167/iovs.06-0886 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
McGwin  G  Jr, Huisingh  C, Jain  SG, Girkin  CA, Owsley  C.  Binocular visual field impairment in glaucoma and at-fault motor vehicle collisions.   J Glaucoma. 2015;24(2):138-143. doi:10.1097/IJG.0b013e3182a0761c PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Baig  S, Diniz-Filho  A, Wu  Z,  et al.  Association of fast visual field loss with risk of falling in patients with glaucoma.   JAMA Ophthalmol. 2016;134(8):880-886. doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2016.1659 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Montana  CL, Bhorade  AM.  Glaucoma and quality of life: fall and driving risk.   Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2018;29(2):135-140. doi:10.1097/ICU.0000000000000455 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Deaths from unintentional injury among adults aged 65 and over: United States, 2000-2013. Accessed July 7, 2018. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db199.htm
9.
Nelson  P, Aspinall  P, O’Brien  C.  Patients’ perception of visual impairment in glaucoma: a pilot study.   Br J Ophthalmol. 1999;83(5):546-552. doi:10.1136/bjo.83.5.546 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Viswanathan  AC, McNaught  AI, Poinoosawmy  D,  et al.  Severity and stability of glaucoma: patient perception compared with objective measurement.   Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117(4):450-454. doi:10.1001/archopht.117.4.450 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Chung  DC, McCague  S, Yu  ZF,  et al.  Novel mobility test to assess functional vision in patients with inherited retinal dystrophies.   Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2018;46(3):247-259. doi:10.1111/ceo.13022 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Medeiros  FA, Weinreb  RNR, R Boer  E, Rosen  PN.  Driving simulation as a performance-based test of visual impairment in glaucoma.   J Glaucoma. 2012;21(4):221-227. doi:10.1097/IJG.0b013e3182071832 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Glen  FC, Smith  ND, Crabb  DP.  Impact of superior and inferior visual field loss on hazard detection in a computer-based driving test.   Br J Ophthalmol. 2015;99(5):613-617. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305932 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
Russell  S, Bennett  J, Wellman  JA,  et al.  Efficacy and safety of voretigene neparvovec (AAV2-hRPE65v2) in patients with RPE65-mediated inherited retinal dystrophy: a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial.   Lancet. 2017;390(10097):849-860. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31868-8 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Bainbridge  JW, Smith  AJ, Barker  SS,  et al.  Effect of gene therapy on visual function in Leber’s congenital amaurosis.   N Engl J Med. 2008;358(21):2231-2239. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0802268 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
16.
Maguire  AM, Simonelli  F, Pierce  EA,  et al.  Safety and efficacy of gene transfer for Leber’s congenital amaurosis.   N Engl J Med. 2008;358(21):2240-2248. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0802315 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
17.
Wei  H, Sawchyn  AK, Myers  JS,  et al.  A clinical method to assess the effect of visual loss on the ability to perform activities of daily living.   Br J Ophthalmol. 2012;96(5):735-741. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2011-300093 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
18.
Ekici  F, Loh  R, Waisbourd  M,  et al.  Relationships between measures of the ability to perform vision-related activities, vision-related quality of life, and clinical findings in patients with glaucoma.   JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015;133(12):1377-1385. doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2015.3426 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
De Maesschalck  R, Jouan-Rimbaud  D, Massart  DL.  The Mahalanobis distance.   Chemom Intell Lab Syst. 2000;50(1):1-18. doi:10.1016/S0169-7439(99)00047-7 Google ScholarCrossref
20.
Brereton  RG.  Hotelling’s T squared distribution, its relationship to the F distribution and its use in multivariate space.   J Chemometrics. 2016;30(1):18-21. doi:10.1002/cem.2763 Google ScholarCrossref
21.
Mangione  CM, Lee  PP, Gutierrez  PR, Spritzer  K, Berry  S, Hays  RD; National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire Field Test Investigators.  Development of the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire.   Arch Ophthalmol. 2001;119(7):1050-1058. doi:10.1001/archopht.119.7.1050 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
Mangione  CM, Lee  PP, Pitts  J, Gutierrez  P, Berry  S, Hays  RD; NEI-VFQ Field Test Investigators.  Psychometric properties of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ).   Arch Ophthalmol. 1998;116(11):1496-1504. doi:10.1001/archopht.116.11.1496 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
23.
Sherwood  MB, Garcia-Siekavizza  A, Meltzer  MI, Hebert  A, Burns  AF, McGorray  S.  Glaucoma’s impact on quality of life and its relation to clinical indicators: a pilot study.   Ophthalmology. 1998;105(3):561-566. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(98)93043-3 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
24.
Janz  NK, Wren  PA, Lichter  PR, Musch  DC, Gillespie  BW, Guire  KE.  Quality of life in newly diagnosed glaucoma patients: the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study.   Ophthalmology. 2001;108(5):887-897. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(00)00624-2 PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    Original Investigation
    March 19, 2020

    Use of Virtual Reality Simulation to Identify Vision-Related Disability in Patients With Glaucoma

    Author Affiliations
    • 1Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, People’s Republic of China
    • 2Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla
    • 3Singapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore
    • 4Division of Biomedical Engineering, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong, People’s Republic of China
    JAMA Ophthalmol. 2020;138(5):490-498. doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2020.0392
    Key Points

    Question  Can real-world visual performance be estimated with virtual reality simulations to assess vision-related disability in patients with glaucoma?

    Findings  In this cross-sectional study including 98 individuals with glaucoma, vision-related disability was associated with task and lighting condition in patients with glaucoma, with 8.0% to 30.7% having vision-related disability in supermarket shopping, stair navigation, or city navigation. A higher proportion of patients had vision-related disability in nighttime (30.0%-30.7%) than daytime (8.0%-19.8%) navigations.

    Meaning  These results appear to support the hypothesis that virtual reality simulation augments the evaluation of visual disability in clinical care by providing clinicians a new perspective to understand how visual impairment imparts vision-related disability in patients with glaucoma.

    Abstract

    Importance  Clinical assessment of vision-related disability is hampered by the lack of instruments to assess visual performance in real-world situations. Interactive virtual reality (VR) environments displayed in a binocular stereoscopic VR headset have been designed, presumably simulating day-to-day activities to evaluate vision-related disability.

    Objective  To investigate the application of VR to identify vision-related disability in patients with glaucoma.

    Design, Setting, and Participants  In a cross-sectional study, 98 patients with glaucoma and 50 healthy individuals were consecutively recruited from a university eye clinic; all participants were Chinese. The study was conducted between August 30, 2016, and July 31, 2017; data analysis was performed from December 1, 2017, to October 30, 2018.

    Exposures  Measurements of visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, visual field (VF), National Eye Institute 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire Rasch score, and VR disability scores determined from 5 VR simulations: supermarket shopping, stair and city navigations in daytime, and stair and city navigations in nighttime. Duration required to complete the simulation, number of items incorrectly identified, and number of collisions were measured to compute task-specific and overall VR disability scores. Vision-related disability was identified when the VR disability score was outside the normal age-adjusted 95% confidence region.

    Main Outcomes and Measures  Virtual reality disability score.

    Results  In the 98 patients with glaucoma, mean (SD) age was 49.8 (11.6) years and 60 were men (61.2%); in the 50 healthy individuals, mean (SD) age was 48.3 (14.8) years and 16 were men (32.0%). The patients with glaucoma had different degrees of VF loss (122 eyes [62.2%] had moderate or advanced VF defects). The time required to complete the activities by patients with glaucoma vs healthy individuals was longer by 15.2 seconds (95% CI, 5.5-24.9 seconds) or 34.1% (95% CI, 12.4%-55.7%) for the shopping simulation, 72.8 seconds (95% CI, 23.0-122.6 seconds) or 33.8% (95% CI, 10.7%-56.9%) for the nighttime stair navigation, and 38.1 seconds (95% CI, 10.9-65.2 seconds) or 30.8% (95% CI, 8.8%-52.8%) for the nighttime city navigation. The mean (SD) duration was not significantly different between the glaucoma and healthy groups in daytime stair (203.7 [93.7] vs 192.9 [89.1] seconds, P = .52) and city (118.7 [41.5] vs 117.0 [52.3] seconds, P = .85) navigation. For each decibel decrease in binocular VF sensitivity, the risk of collision increased by 15% in nighttime stair (hazard ratio [HR], 1.15; 95% CI, 1.08-1.22) and city (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.08-1.23) navigations. Fifty-eight patients (59.1%) with glaucoma had vision-related disability in at least 1 simulated daily task; a higher proportion of patients had vision-related disability in nighttime city (27 of 88 [30.7%]) and stair (27 of 90 [30.0%]) navigation than in daytime city (7 of 88 [8.0%]) and stair (19 of 96 [19.8%]) navigation. The overall VR disability score was associated with the National Eye Institute 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire Rasch score (R2 = 0.207).

    Conclusions and Relevance  These findings suggest that vision-related disability is associated with lighting condition and task in patients with glaucoma. Virtual reality may allow eye care professionals to understand the patients’ perspectives on how visual impairment imparts disability in daily living and provide a new paradigm to augment the assessment of vision-related disability.

    ×