Phenotypic Analysis of Intentionally Created Monocular Visual Field Defects During Bilateral Randomized Visual Field Testing Using the Imo Vifa®

<b>Background/Objectives:</b> The imo Vifa<sup>®</sup> is reportedly useful for diagnosing functional visual field loss; however, its potential for detecting malingering is unclear. Here, we intentionally simulated monocular visual field defects under bilateral randomized visual field testing conditions using the imo Vifa<sup>®</sup> in healthy participants and compared their resulting defect phenotypes. <b>Methods:</b> Twenty participants (mean age, 37.3 ± 12.4 years; 12 orthoptists, 1 physician, and 7 administrative staff members) without ocular disease were enrolled. Four types of monocular visual field defects were simulated: right eye nasal hemianopia, left eye temporal hemianopia, right eye centripetal visual field constriction, and left eye central scotoma. Bilateral randomized visual field testing was performed using the AIZE-rapid mode with the 24-2 and 24plus(1) programs. <b>Results:</b> Accurate simulation of the intended defects was challenging. Orthoptists produced left homonymous hemianopia for right nasal hemianopia and left temporal hemianopia. Regarding right nasal hemianopia, many office workers generated patterns resembling right homonymous hemianopia-like, whereas for left temporal hemianopia, noncertified orthoptists produced patterns similar to those of left homonymous hemianopia-like. Considering the right centripetal constriction, all orthoptists produced the intended centripetal constriction, whereas non-orthoptists generated right homonymous hemianopia-like or patchy patterns. Orthoptists produced central scotomas or patchy patterns for the left central scotoma, whereas non-orthoptists generated left homonymous hemianopia-like patterns. <b>Conclusions:</b> Creating targeted monocular abnormalities during bilateral randomized visual field testing was challenging. Differences in the participants' understanding of visual field testing influenced the resulting patterns. In future research, having participants create monocular visual field defects under occlusion conditions would be necessary.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Published
2025-12-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15010009
Primary Topic
Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Phenotypic Analysis of Intentionally Created Monocular Visual Field Defects During Bilateral Randomized Visual Field Testing Using the Imo Vifa®

Tatsushi Kaga, Akeno Tamaoki, Takashi Kojima, Y Takagi et al.
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
article

Phenotypic Analysis of Intentionally Created Monocular Visual Field Defects During Bilateral Randomized Visual Field Testing Using the Imo Vifa®

Tatsushi Kaga, Akeno Tamaoki, Takashi Kojima, Y Takagi, Y. Kawaguchi
article en

Abstract

<b>Background/Objectives:</b> The imo Vifa<sup>®</sup> is reportedly useful for diagnosing functional visual field loss; however, its potential for detecting malingering is unclear. Here, we intentionally simulated monocular visual field defects under bilateral randomized visual field testing conditions using the imo Vifa<sup>®</sup> in healthy participants and compared their resulting defect phenotypes. <b>Methods:</b> Twenty participants (mean age, 37.3 ± 12.4 years; 12 orthoptists, 1 physician, and 7 administrative staff members) without ocular disease were enrolled. Four types of monocular visual field defects were simulated: right eye nasal hemianopia, left eye temporal hemianopia, right eye centripetal visual field constriction, and left eye central scotoma. Bilateral randomized visual field testing was performed using the AIZE-rapid mode with the 24-2 and 24plus(1) programs. <b>Results:</b> Accurate simulation of the intended defects was challenging. Orthoptists produced left homonymous hemianopia for right nasal hemianopia and left temporal hemianopia. Regarding right nasal hemianopia, many office workers generated patterns resembling right homonymous hemianopia-like, whereas for left temporal hemianopia, noncertified orthoptists produced patterns similar to those of left homonymous hemianopia-like. Considering the right centripetal constriction, all orthoptists produced the intended centripetal constriction, whereas non-orthoptists generated right homonymous hemianopia-like or patchy patterns. Orthoptists produced central scotomas or patchy patterns for the left central scotoma, whereas non-orthoptists generated left homonymous hemianopia-like patterns. <b>Conclusions:</b> Creating targeted monocular abnormalities during bilateral randomized visual field testing was challenging. Differences in the participants' understanding of visual field testing influenced the resulting patterns. In future research, having participants create monocular visual field defects under occlusion conditions would be necessary.

Journal of Clinical MedicineVol. 15(1)
Kani Tono Hospital (JP), Minamiaoyama Eye Clinic (JP), Chukyo Hospital (JP)
Openalex Percentile: Top 47%
Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.