VR Perimetry May Match HVF in Glaucoma
Virtual reality testing shortened visual field exams and was preferred among most patients in a retrospective study.
By
Andrea Surnit
June 3, 2026
Clinical Scorecard: VR Perimetry May Match HVF in Glaucoma
At a Glance
Category Detail
Condition Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension Key Mechanisms Comparison of visual field measurements between VR perimetry and HVF testing. Target Population Patients with ocular hypertension, glaucoma suspect, or glaucoma. Care Setting Duke Eye Center
Key Highlights
VR perimetry testing time averaged 122 seconds, significantly shorter than HVF testing at 253 seconds. Mean deviation measurements were similar between VR and HVF testing. A majority of patients preferred VR perimetry over HVF testing. Reliability metrics indicated lower fixation loss rates with VR perimetry. No statistically significant sensitivity differences were found between the two modalities. Guideline-Based Recommendations
Diagnosis
Evaluate visual field using both VR perimetry and HVF testing. Management
Consider VR perimetry as an adjunct in glaucoma management. Monitoring & Follow-up
Future studies needed to assess VR perimetry for tracking visual field changes over time. Risks
Study limitations include retrospective design and modest sample size. Patient & Prescribing Data
79 eyes from 50 patients with varying severity of glaucoma.
VR perimetry may be beneficial in settings with limited access to HVF analyzers.
Clinical Best Practices
Utilize VR perimetry for efficient visual field testing. Monitor patient preferences when selecting testing modalities. Related Resources & Content
