Comparison of Virtual Reality Perimetry and Standard Automated Perimetry in Healthy Adults: A Prospective Cohort Study

Abstract

Aim: To compare virtual reality perimetry (VRP) with standard automated perimetry (SAP) in healthy adults. Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted. Fifty eyes from 25 healthy subjects were tested. Each participant underwent two visual field tests: the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) 24-2 and the VisuALL™ T-24. Test order was fixed. Key parameters were recorded: test duration, foveal sensitivity, pointwise sensitivity, mean deviation (MD) and mean sensitivity (MS). A five-minute rest separated the tests. Bland–Altman plots and Spearman correlation were used for analysis. Results: Test duration was significantly shorter with VRP (p < 0.001). Mean foveal sensitivity and MD values were similar across devices. A strong positive correlation was found for global MS (r= 0. 71, p < 0.001). Regional sensitivity showed no significant differences. Pointwise differences remained within ±2 dB in most loci. Inferonasal discrepancies reached –4.7 dB. Bland–Altman analysis showed good agreement, with a mean MS difference of 0.5 dB. Conclusion: VRP showed strong correlation and high agreement with SAP. Test time was shorter. Patient comfort and accessibility were improved. Results support the use of VRP as a reliable alternative in healthy individuals. Broader studies are needed in pathological cases.