Pilot Study Assessing the Safety and Acceptance of a Novel Virtual Reality System to Improve Visual Function

PURPOSE

To assess the feasibility of the clinical use of a novel Virtual Reality (VR) training software designed to be used for active vision therapy in amblyopic patients by determining its preliminary safety and acceptance on the visual function of healthy adults.

METHODS

Pilot study enrolling 10 individuals (3 men, 7 women, mean age: 31.8 ± 6.5 years) with a best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of ≥ .90 (decimal) in both eyes were evaluated before and after 20 minutes of exposure to the NEIVATECH VR system using the HTC Vive Pro Eye head mounted display. Visual function assessment included near (40 cm) and distance (6 m) cover test (CT), stereopsis, binocular accommodative facility (BAF), near point of convergence (NPC), near point of accommodation (NPA), accommodative-convergence over accommodation (AC/A) ratio and positive and negative fusional vergences. Safety was assessed using the VR Sickness Questionnaire (VRSQ) and acceptance using the Technology Acceptance Model ;(TAM). Changes in all these variables after VR exposure were analyzed.

RESULTS

Short-term exposure to the NEIVATECH VR system only induced statistically significant changes in distance phoria (p = .016), but these changes were not clinically relevant. No significant changes were observed in VRSQ oculo-motricity and disorientation scores after exposure (p = .197 and .317, respectively). TAM scores showed a good acceptance of the system in terms of perceived enjoyment and perceived ease of use, although some concerns were raised in relation to the intention-to-use domain.

CONCLUSION

Exposure to the NEIVATECH VR system does not seem to adversely affect the visual function in healthy adults and its safety and acceptance profile seems to be adequate for supporting its potential use in other populations, such as amblyopic patients.

Comorbidity and osteoporotic fracture: approach through predictive modeling techniques using the OSTEOMED registry

Purpose

To examine the response to anti-osteoporotic treatment, considered as incident fragility fractures after a minimum follow-up of 1 year, according to sex, age, and number of comorbidities of the patients.

Methods

For this retrospective observational study, data from baseline and follow-up visits on the number of comorbidities, prescribed anti-osteoporotic treatment and vertebral, humerus or hip fractures in 993 patients from the OSTEOMED registry were analyzed using logistic regression and an artificial network model.

Results

Logistic regression showed that the probability of reducing fractures for each anti-osteoporotic treatment considered was independent of sex, age, and the number of comorbidities, increasing significantly only in males taking vitamin D (OR = 7.918), patients without comorbidities taking vitamin D (OR = 4.197) and patients with ≥ 3 comorbidities taking calcium (OR = 9.412). Logistic regression correctly classified 96% of patients (Hosmer–Lemeshow = 0.492) compared with the artificial neural network model, which correctly classified 95% of patients (AUC = 0.6).

Conclusion

In general, sex, age and the number of comorbidities did not influence the likelihood that a given anti-osteoporotic treatment improved the risk of incident fragility fractures after 1 year, but this appeared to increase when patients had been treated with risedronate, strontium or teriparatide. The two models used classified patients similarly, but predicted differently in terms of the probability of improvement, with logistic regression being the better fit.