JP2017192564A - Vision testing apparatus, reliability evaluation method, reliability evaluation program, and reliability evaluation system - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a technique capable of reducing a burden applied to a subject when evaluating reliability of a vision test using a perimeter.SOLUTION: A vision testing apparatus includes: a perimeter for measuring a prescribed site of an eye a plurality of times by changing numerical conditions to acquire one measurement result; a storage section for storing answers of a subject to the respective numerical conditions in the plurality of times of measurement; an allocation section for allocating a role as a base of a reliability index to at least any of the respective numerical conditions related to the answers of the subject stored in the storage section; and a reliability index acquisition section that refers to the answers of the subject to the allocated numerical condition allocated by the allocation section, from the storage section and acquires a reliability index to the vision test on the basis of the answers. The related technique of the vision testing apparatus is also provided.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 1

Description

  The present invention relates to a visual inspection device, a reliability evaluation method, a reliability evaluation program, and a reliability evaluation system.

  Currently, visual inspection using a perimeter is performed. In this visual inspection, reliability is also evaluated. This reliability is determined by various factors. For example, reliability attributed to a device such as a perimeter or reliability attributed to a subject. Among them, Patent Document 1 is known as a method for evaluating reliability caused by a subject.

  The method described in Patent Document 1 is an evaluation method when performing visual inspection in a dynamic visual field. For example, in patent document 1, in addition to the measurement performed by normal visual inspection, the measurement for reliability evaluation is performed separately. The reliability of the visual inspection is evaluated based on the subject's answer obtained by this additional measurement.

JP 2008-43481 A

  As shown in Patent Document 1, conventionally, measurement for visual inspection and measurement for reliability evaluation are set separately from the beginning. In addition, in the technique described in Patent Document 1, a target is separately prepared for measurement for reliability evaluation. For this reason, with the technique described in Patent Document 1, it is necessary to prepare a target separately and perform measurement for reliability evaluation separately.

  The effect of this will be described with specific numerical examples. Usually, in visual inspection (specifically, visual field measurement) using a perimeter, a target is presented approximately 200 to 500 times for one eye for one inspection. However, when the method of Patent Document 1 is applied, in order to evaluate the reliability of the visual inspection, presentation of the target of several tens of times is added to the number of 200 to 500 times. As a result, the time required for the entire visual inspection naturally increases, and as a result, fatigue accumulates in the subject and the burden on the subject increases.

  A main object of the present invention is to provide a technique capable of reducing the burden on a subject when evaluating the reliability of visual inspection using a perimeter.

The inventor has intensively studied a method for solving the above-described problem. As a result, the present inventor thought that the option of not separately performing the measurement for reliability evaluation could be taken. That is, as a measurement for visual inspection, for a predetermined part of the eye, since the numerical condition was changed and the measurement was performed multiple times, any of the contents related to the multiple measurements already performed, We obtained the knowledge that it could be used later for the evaluation of reliability.
The following aspects have been made based on the above findings.

(First aspect)
The first aspect of the present invention is:
A perimeter that changes the numerical conditions and performs multiple measurements for a given part of the eye to obtain one measurement result;
A storage unit that stores a subject's answer to each numerical condition in the plurality of measurements,
An assigning unit that assigns a role as a basis for a reliability index for at least one of the numerical conditions related to the response of the subject stored in the storage unit;
A reliability index acquisition unit that obtains a reliability index for visual inspection based on the response by referring to the response of the subject to the assigned numerical condition allocated by the allocation unit from the storage unit;
With
It is a visual inspection device.
(Second aspect)
The second aspect of the present invention is:
A display unit that graphs and displays the reliability index obtained by the reliability index acquisition unit;
Further comprising
The visual inspection apparatus according to the first aspect.
(Third aspect)
The third aspect of the present invention is:
The storage unit also stores a subject's answer to each numerical condition in the multiple measurements at other predetermined sites of the eye,
The reliability index acquisition unit is configured to send a response of the subject to each of the assigned numerical conditions in each predetermined part of each eye stored in the storage unit, and each of the assignments from the numerical values of the measurement results. Obtain a reliability index for visual inspection by summarizing according to the degree of separation of numerical conditions,
The visual inspection apparatus according to the first or second aspect.
(Fourth aspect)
The fourth aspect of the present invention is:
A method for evaluating the reliability of visual inspection using a perimeter,
For a given part of the eye, change the numerical conditions to obtain one measurement result, and at least one of the numerical conditions in multiple measurements performed by the perimeter, An assignment process to assign roles;
A reliability index acquisition step of obtaining a reliability index for visual inspection based on the subject's answer to the allocation numerical condition allocated in the allocation step;
Having
This is a reliability evaluation method.
(5th aspect)
According to a fifth aspect of the present invention,
The reliability evaluation method according to the fourth aspect, wherein the reliability index obtained in the reliability index acquisition step is displayed in a graph.
(Sixth aspect)
The sixth aspect of the present invention is:
In the reliability index acquisition step, the subject's answer to each of the assigned numerical conditions in each predetermined part of each eye is set to a degree of separation of each of the assigned numerical conditions from each of the measured result values. It is the reliability evaluation method as described in the said 4th or 5th aspect which obtains the reliability parameter | index with respect to a visual inspection by putting together according.
(Seventh aspect)
The seventh aspect of the present invention is
A reliability evaluation program for visual inspection using a perimeter,
For each predetermined part of the eye, each of the storage units storing the subject's answers to each numerical condition in multiple measurements performed by the perimeter while changing the numerical condition to obtain one measurement result An assigning unit that assigns a role as a basis of a reliability index to at least one of the numerical conditions;
A reliability index acquisition unit that obtains a reliability index for visual inspection based on the response by referring to the response of the subject to the assigned numerical condition allocated by the allocation unit from the storage unit,
As a computer to function,
This is a reliability evaluation program.
(Eighth aspect)
The eighth aspect of the present invention is
A reliability evaluation system for visual inspection using a perimeter,
For each predetermined part of the eye, each of the storage units storing the subject's answers to each numerical condition in multiple measurements performed by the perimeter while changing the numerical condition to obtain one measurement result An assigning unit that assigns a role as a basis of a reliability index to at least one of the numerical conditions;
A reliability index acquisition unit that obtains a reliability index for visual inspection based on the response by referring to the response of the subject to the assigned numerical condition allocated by the allocation unit from the storage unit;
With
It is a reliability evaluation system.

  ADVANTAGE OF THE INVENTION According to this invention, the burden on the subject at the time of evaluating the reliability of the visual inspection using a perimeter can be reduced.

It is a block diagram which shows the structural example of the visual inspection apparatus which concerns on embodiment of this invention. It is the schematic which shows the structural example of the perimeter based on embodiment of this invention. It is the reliability index obtained by the visual inspection apparatus which concerns on embodiment of this invention, Comprising: It is the figure which graphed the reliability index in the measurement with respect to a left eye. It is a block diagram which shows the structural example of the reliability evaluation system which concerns on embodiment of this invention.

Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the drawings.
In the embodiment of the present invention, description will be made in the following order.
1. 1. Configuration of visual inspection device 2. Reliability evaluation method 3. Reliability evaluation program and reliability evaluation system 4. Effects of the embodiment Modifications etc. The luminance (dB) mentioned in this specification is dark when the numerical value is large and bright when the numerical value is small.

<1. Configuration of visual inspection device>
FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating a configuration example of a visual inspection device 20 according to an embodiment of the present invention. Hereinafter, the main structure of the visual inspection apparatus 20 in this embodiment is demonstrated.

(Perimeter)
The perimeter 1 in the present embodiment is for obtaining a numerical result as a measurement result by changing a numerical condition and performing measurement a plurality of times for a predetermined part of the eye. As this perimeter 1, a known one may be adopted as long as it can measure the visual field. That is, the mechanical configuration of the visual inspection device 20 is not particularly limited, and the optical system and display element are not particularly limited.
For example, a perimeter 1 as shown in FIG. 2 may be adopted. FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram illustrating a configuration example of the perimeter 1 according to the embodiment of the present invention. A perimeter 1 shown in FIG. 2 is a head-mounted perimeter that is used by being attached to the head 3 of a subject 2. The perimeter 1 generally includes a device main body 5 and a mounting tool 6 mechanically connected to the device main body 5.

  The apparatus main body 5 includes a housing 7 having a space inside. The internal space of the housing 7 is divided into left and right. The reason is that the visual field inspection is separately performed on the left eye 8L and the right eye 8R of the subject 2.

  The apparatus main body 5 includes a display optical system 11 and a display element 12. The apparatus main body 5 is provided with a display optical system 11 and a display element 12 independently so as to be able to cope with either the left or right eye as the eye to be examined. That is, in one space of the housing 7, a display optical system 11L and a display element 12L are provided corresponding to the left eye 8L of the subject, and in the other internal space of the housing 7, the subject's left eye 8L is provided. A display optical system 11R and a display element 12R are provided corresponding to the right eye 8R. The distance between the optical axes of the left and right display optical systems 11L and 11R can be adjusted according to the distance between the pupils of the subject 2 by an adjustment mechanism (not shown).

  The mounting tool 6 is for mounting the apparatus main body 5 on the head 3 of the subject 2. The wearing tool 6 includes a belt 13 that is stretched in a U-shape from both sides of the subject 2 to the back of the head, and a belt 14 that is stretched over the top of the subject 2. Then, in a state where the length of the belt 14 is adjusted appropriately, the belt 13 is pulled and tightened from the back of the head, whereby the apparatus main body 5 can be firmly fixed and mounted on the head 3 of the subject 2. ing. The configuration of the wearing tool 6 can be changed as appropriate.

  In the following description, when the left eye 8L and the right eye 8R of the subject 2 are described without distinction between left and right, the symbols L and R are omitted and the eyeball 8 and the pupil 9 are collectively referred to. Similarly, when the display optical systems 11L and 11R and the display elements 12L and 12R are described without distinction for the left eye and the right eye, the reference optical systems 11 and 11 are omitted by omitting the symbols L and R, respectively. Collectively referred to as the display element 12. This is the same for other configurations.

  Using the perimeter 1, the measurement result is obtained. As this measurement result, for example, one numerical condition among the respective numerical conditions (here, a predetermined value of luminance, for example, luminance of 30 dB) can be mentioned.

  The acquisition of the measurement results as described above may be performed by the examiner or by the perimeter 1.

  When the examiner performs, for example, the subject is visible when the luminance of the target is 30 dB (hereinafter, dB is omitted), while the subject is visible when the luminance is 31 (darker target). When the person cannot visually recognize, the examiner may acquire the measurement result by using the luminance 30 as the measurement result.

When the perimeter 1 performs measurement result acquisition, for example, the following is performed.
The answer of the subject to each numerical condition stored in the storage unit 21 (described later) is divided into a yes answer and a no answer at a predetermined luminance. Therefore, the perimeter 1 reads from the storage unit 21 the luminance related to the difference between the Yes response and the No response among the responses of the subject in the storage unit 21, and the measurement result is obtained by using the luminance as the measurement result. You can get it. In this case, the perimeter 1 includes a measurement unit for visual field measurement and a measurement result acquisition unit that performs the above processing. Note that the measurement result acquisition unit may be provided outside the perimeter 1.

(Memory part)
The storage unit 21 of the present embodiment has a function of storing a subject's answer to each numerical condition in a plurality of measurements (broken line arrow (1) in FIG. 1). The mechanical configuration of the storage unit 21 may employ, for example, a known HDD (Hard disk drive) or a nonvolatile memory.

  Note that configurations other than the storage unit 21 (for example, an allocation unit 22 and a reliability index acquisition unit 23 described later) are also known as mechanical configurations such as a known CPU (Central Processing Unit), RAM (Random Access Memory), and ROM. These functions may be exhibited by a computer having a known configuration including a combination of (Read Only Memory), HDD, and various interfaces. Further, the storage unit 21 may be incorporated in the perimeter 1 described above.

(Assignment part)
The assigning unit 22 according to the present embodiment has a function of assigning a role as a basis for the reliability index to at least one of the numerical conditions related to the subject's answer stored in the storage unit 21 (FIG. 1). Dashed arrow (2)). The assigning unit 22 is one of the major features in the present embodiment.

  In the past, there was only the idea of separating the measurement for visual inspection and the measurement for reliability evaluation from the beginning. On the other hand, in the present embodiment, first, the perimeter 1 obtains one numerical condition (luminance) among the numerical conditions as a measurement result. In addition, a role as a basis of the reliability index is assigned to at least one of the numerical conditions (assigned numerical conditions) in the plurality of measurements that have been performed and stored in the storage unit 21. More specifically, a reliability index is obtained from the response of the subject under this assigned numerical condition. As will be described in detail later, for example, if a subject presents a very bright target, the subject should answer Yes (viewable), but if he answers No to this target This raises doubts about the reliability of visual inspection. Then, the reliability index is obtained by counting the number of times of No.

  In the past (for example, Patent Document 1), a target is separately prepared for measurement for reliability evaluation. However, in this embodiment, only a target for visual inspection is used. In other words, in this embodiment, each numerical condition in a plurality of measurements that have already been performed is not given the role of reliability evaluation at the stage before the measurement. Only after the measurement, the role of reliability evaluation is assigned. It should be noted that the object to which the role as the basis of the reliability index is assigned may be at least one of the numerical conditions, and as shown in FIG. 3, the numerical condition other than the numerical value of the measurement result (in other words, the measurement result (Numerical conditions apart from numerical values) may be adopted. Specifically, numerical values other than the numerical value of the measurement result among the numerical conditions related to the subject's answer stored in the storage unit 21 using the above-described allocation unit 22 (in other words, the measurement result The role as the basis of the reliability index is assigned to a numerical condition that is far from the numerical value.

  Incidentally, in the technique described in Patent Document 1, although it is repeated, a target for reliability evaluation is prepared from the beginning in the measurement stage. Therefore, as in this embodiment, the necessity of assigning the role of the reliability evaluation base to each numerical condition that has already been measured does not arise from Patent Document 1 and it is necessary to bother the above-described assignment unit 22 Sex does not occur.

(Reliability index acquisition department)
The reliability index acquisition unit 23 of the present embodiment has a function of referring to the subject's answer to the assigned numerical value condition from the storage unit 21 and obtaining a reliability index for visual inspection based on the answer (FIG. 1). Dashed arrow (3)). It is as follows when picking it up.

  First, the assigned numerical condition assigned the role as the basis of the reliability index is a value that is different from the numerical value of the measurement result as described above. For example, if the numerical value of the measurement result is luminance 30, the assigned numerical value condition is luminance 20 or 40.

  If a test target with a luminance of 20 is presented to the subject and the test subject replied that “the target target could not be viewed (that is, No)”, the reliability of the visual test is affected. This is because if the numerical value of the measurement result (that is, the threshold value of whether the subject is visible or invisible) is luminance 30, it is strange that a target with luminance 20 brighter than that cannot be visually recognized. Nevertheless, if the answer of No is obtained, there is a suspicion that there is some problem in the judgment of the subject (for example, confusion, false answers, etc.), and visual (mainly due to the subject) This will deteriorate the reliability of the inspection.

That is, when a numerical condition having a lower numerical value of brightness than the measurement result (that is, brighter) is assigned as the assigned numerical condition, the answer of the subject must be “Yes”, but the answer “No” is obtained. If this happens, count this. If the number of counts is large or the ratio (for example, the number of counts / the number of measurements under the assigned numerical condition) is large, the reliability is considered low, and if the number of counts is small or the ratio is small, the reliability is considered high. Is possible. By the way, the same method is also used when the reliability index is obtained under the assigned numerical value condition where the numerical value of the luminance is higher (that is, darker) than the measurement result.
In the present specification, the reliability index is an index indicating a high level of reliability, and the number of responses that cannot be normally performed as described above in the above-described allocated numerical conditions (numerical conditions far from the measurement results). It is a result obtained based on FIG. 3 is a graph in which the reliability index is embodied by the probability of answering yes (response probability) in the assigned numerical value condition (details will be described later). In this case, the response probability is normally 1 when the target is brighter than the measurement result (positive side) in FIG. 3 and is 0 when the target is darker (negative side) than the measurement result. It is a result (result with high reliability). That is, when the target is brighter than the measurement result, the response probability is smaller than 1, or conversely, when the target is darker than the measurement result, the response probability is larger than 0. If it is, the measurement is evaluated as having low reliability.
With the above method, the reliability index acquisition unit 23 obtains a reliability index for visual inspection.

  The above reliability index relates to a case where a plurality of measurements are performed on a predetermined part of the eye. On the other hand, after obtaining the measurement result also in other predetermined parts of the eye, among the values stored in the storage unit 21, a numerical condition away from the numerical value of the measurement result is used as the basis of the reliability index by the assigning unit 22. It is preferable that the reliability index is acquired by the above-described reliability index acquisition unit 23 after the above role is assigned. The reason is as follows.

  For example, a case where a plurality of measurements are performed on the parts A, B, and C as predetermined parts of the eye is assumed. In this case, a plurality of measurements for the parts A, B, and C have already been performed, and the storage unit 21 stores the subject's answer to each numerical condition in the plurality of measurements for the part A, and similarly for the part B Each numerical condition and its answer, each numerical condition for the part C and its answer are stored.

Regarding the part A, the perimeter 1 is used, and one numerical condition is obtained as a measurement result (for example, luminance 30). In addition, among the numerical conditions related to the subject's answer stored in the storage unit 21 by the assigning unit 22, numerical values that are separated from the numerical values of the measurement results (for example, luminance 29, 28, 27..., 31, 32, 33... Here, the measurement result regarding the part A is a, and a value obtained by subtracting the assigned numerical value condition from the numerical value of the measurement result is attached, and the assigned numerical value condition is a ₊₁ (luminance 29), a ₊₂ (luminance 28), a ₊₃ (luminance). 27), ... and a- ₁ (luminance 31), a- ₂ (luminance 32), a- ₃ (luminance 33), .... The description of +1, −1, etc. in the assigned numerical value condition indicates the degree of separation from the luminance value as the measurement result. As an example, in FIGS. 3A and 3B in which the reliability index obtained by the visual inspection device 20 according to the present embodiment is graphed, this degree of separation is taken as the horizontal axis.
As the horizontal axis, a numerical condition in which the target is brighter is placed on the right side from ± 0 (the numerical value of the measurement result). Conversely, the target is darker on the left side from ± 0 (the numerical value of the measurement result). The numerical condition that has become.
On the vertical axis, a value is set when the number of times tested under the assigned numerical value condition is used as a denominator and the number of answers of Yes as a numerator. Incidentally, FIG. 3 (b) shows the number of answers in circle size with respect to FIG. 3 (a).

The same processing is performed for the part B which is another part of the eye of the subject. For example, for the part B, the perimeter 1 is used, and one numerical condition is obtained as a measurement result (for example, luminance 35). Further, among the numerical conditions related to the subject's answer stored in the storage unit 21 by the allocating unit 22, the numerical conditions separated from the numerical values of the measurement results (for example, luminance 34, 33, 32... And 36, 37, 38...) Are assigned numerical condition. Here, the measurement result regarding the part B is b, and the assigned numerical value conditions are b ₊₁ , b ₊₂ , b ₊₃ ,... And b ₋₁ , b ₋₂ , b _−3,.

The same process is performed for the part C which is another part of the eye of the subject. For example, for the part C, the perimeter 1 is used, and one numerical condition is obtained as a measurement result (for example, luminance 27). In addition, among the numerical conditions related to the subject's answer stored in the storage unit 21 by the assigning unit 22, the numerical conditions (for example, luminance 26, 25, 24. 29, 30...) Are assigned numerical condition. Here, the measurement result regarding the part B is c, and the assigned numerical value conditions are c ₊₁ , c ₊₂ , c ₊₃ ,... And c ₋₁ , c ₋₂ , c _−3,.

Then, the responses of the subject to the respective assigned numerical conditions in the respective parts A to C are summarized according to the degree of separation from the numerical values of the respective measurement results of the respective assigned numerical conditions. That is, as shown in FIG. A value of ± 0 is arranged in the center, and the right is the degree of separation to the plus (direction in which the target is brighter), and the left is the degree of separation to the minus (the direction in which the target is dark). That is, in the scale of +1 on the horizontal axis, the sum of a ₊₁ , b ₊₁ , and c ₊₁ is described. That's the _example, a _{+1, b +1,} and as the denominator the total number of times measured in _{c +1, a +1, b +1} , and the molecule the number of answers Yes in _{c +1.} If the degree of separation is +1, it should be brighter than the measurement result, so that the subject's answer should be Yes no matter how many times it is done. In FIG. 3, if the horizontal scale is +1, the value on the vertical axis should be 1.0 (100%). That is, it is evaluated that the degree of reliability deterioration is higher as the frequency of the vertical axis value being lower than 1.0 in the region to the right of the scale ± 0 on the horizontal axis is higher.

Similarly, the scale of −3 on the horizontal axis describes a sum of a ₋₃ , b ₋₃ , and c ₋₃ . If the degree of separation is -3, it should be darker than the measurement result, so the answer of the subject should be No. In FIG. 3, if the scale is -3 on the horizontal axis, the value on the vertical axis should normally be 0.0 (0%). That is, it is evaluated that the degree of reliability deterioration is higher as the frequency of the vertical axis value being higher than 0.0 in the region on the left side of the scale ± 0 on the horizontal axis is higher.

Note that the examiner or the like may set the evaluation (determination) criteria as appropriate. For example, when the horizontal axis is a positive value (bright), it may be set to determine that there is no reliability if a No answer is obtained even once in one assigned numerical value condition. An upper limit may be set for the number of responses. Moreover, as shown on the vertical axis | shaft of FIG. 3, it is good also considering the value of the range of 0.0-1.0 as a minimum. For example, when the horizontal axis is a positive value (bright), it may be determined that the reliability is maintained as long as it is 0.8 or more.
Incidentally, the above evaluation (determination) may be performed by one configuration of the computer. That is, the reliability index acquisition may further include a determination unit that is controlled by the control unit and that performs the above-described evaluation (determination).

  In the above example, only the three parts A to C and −3 to +3 are described for the convenience of explanation, but of course, the above evaluation may be performed for a larger number of parts and degrees of separation. In addition, although the assigned numerical value condition is specified by dividing the degree of separation by one, it may be specified by dividing by two, or a predetermined numerical condition may be assigned to the pinpoint as the basis of the reliability index.

The numerical condition when the degree of separation is −1 or +1 is a numerical condition that is very close to the measurement result (threshold value). On the other hand, as an evaluation of the reliability with respect to the visual inspection, it is preferable to use a numerical condition that is surely visible or invisible to the subject as the assigned numerical condition. In view of this, when the luminance is adopted as the numerical condition, it is preferable that the assignment numerical condition is a numerical condition in which the degree of separation from the measurement result is −3 or less and +3 or more, preferably −5 or less and +5 or more.
If another expression is specified, 20% or more when the degree of separation is the largest among the degrees of separation from the measurement results in each numerical condition related to the responses of all subjects stored in the storage unit 21 ( It is preferable that the numerical condition of the degree of separation (preferably 40% or more) be the assigned numerical condition. In the example of luminance, when luminance 30 is confirmed as a measurement result and measurement is performed in a luminance range of 10 to 50, luminance is 26 or less or luminance 34 or more (preferably luminance 24 or less or luminance 36 or more. ) Numerical condition should be assigned numerical condition.

  Of course, parameters other than the luminance (for example, the size of the target, the presentation time, the blinking degree (cycle), etc.) may be adopted as the numerical condition. The “numerical condition” in this specification refers to a condition that can be expressed by a numerical value. For example, in the display unit 24 described later, it is assumed that the luminance is displayed not by a numerical value but by a rank (symbol), but even in that case, the luminance having a predetermined numerical value after all is expressed by a symbol. It is expressing. As a result, it can be said that the technical idea of the present invention is also reflected in this case.

(Display section)
In addition to the main configuration described above, it is preferable to include a display unit 24 that displays the evaluation result obtained by the reliability index acquisition unit 23 in a graph (broken line arrow (4) in FIG. 1). For example, if the reliability index graphed as shown in FIG. 3A is viewed, the examiner can intuitively grasp the reliability. Further, by displaying the number of answers in a circle size as shown in FIG. 3B, the reliability can be grasped in more detail and intuitively. In addition, since the number of denominators and numerator samples in the reliability index increases as the number of eye parts to be measured increases, the accuracy of reliability evaluation improves. Of course, the reliability index may be displayed in the form of a list according to the method of reliability evaluation and the examiner's preference, but it is preferable to make it a graph because it is easier to grasp visually. In addition, there is no limitation in particular about the form of a graph, A line graph as shown in FIG. 3 may be sufficient, and a bar graph etc. may be sufficient.

  Incidentally, a specific configuration of the display unit 24 may be a known one. For example, a configuration in which a display (not shown) connected to the visual inspection device 20 is prepared in front of the examiner, and a graph of the evaluation result together with various information related to visual inspection may be displayed. .

  The various configurations described above are controlled by a control unit (not shown). The control unit consists of a CPU (Central Processing Unit), RAM (Random Access Memory), ROM (Read Only Memory), HDD (Hard disk drive), a combination of various interfaces, etc. built in the above-mentioned housing Has been. The control unit is configured to realize various functions by the CPU executing predetermined programs stored in the ROM or the HDD.

<2. Reliability Evaluation Method>
Among the functions performed by the visual inspection device 20 described above, the technical idea of the present invention also reflects the contents other than the visual field inspection for the subject, that is, the method for evaluating the reliability of the visual inspection from the data obtained by the visual field inspection. Has been.

  For example, the reliability evaluation method in this embodiment includes at least the following steps.

(Preparation process)
In this step, the contents before setting of allocation numerical condition (allocation step described later) by the allocation unit 22 are performed. For example, for a predetermined part of the eye, the numerical condition is changed and the perimeter 1 performs a plurality of measurements, and the measurement result is acquired. The contents obtained at that time, that is, the test subject's answer to each numerical condition is stored in the storage unit 21.

(Assignment process)
In this step, for a predetermined part of the eye, measurement is one numerical condition among the numerical conditions among the numerical conditions in a plurality of measurements performed by the perimeter 1 by changing the numerical conditions. The role as the basis of the reliability index is assigned to the numerical condition away from the numerical value of the result. Note that the content performed in this step is the same as the content performed in the above-described allocation unit 22 described above, and thus detailed description thereof is omitted.

(Reliability index acquisition process)
In this step, a reliability index for visual inspection is obtained based on the subject's answer to the assigned numerical condition assigned in the assigning step. Since the content performed in this step is the same as the content performed in the above-described reliability index acquisition unit 23 as in the assignment step, detailed description thereof is omitted.

<3. Reliability Evaluation Program and Reliability Evaluation System>
The above-described reliability evaluation method can also be applied to the reliability evaluation program and the reliability evaluation system 30. This will be described below. However, the contents already described (for example, the function of each component) are omitted.

  First, regarding the reliability evaluation system 30, the visual inspection apparatus 20 shown in FIG. 2 may include the storage unit 21 and the perimeter 1 as separate bodies. A block diagram of the reliability evaluation system 30 is shown in FIG. In FIG. 4, the storage unit 21 and the perimeter 1 are provided at a location different from the reliability evaluation system 30, while both configurations include communication such as a public line such as the Internet, an internal intranet, Wi-Fi, and the like. The system is connected to the reliability evaluation system 30 via a line. The display unit 24 may also be provided outside the reliability evaluation system 30. In that case, the displayed reliability index is displayed on the display unit 24 outside the system via the communication line.

In the assigning unit 22 shown in FIG. 4, for a predetermined part of the eye, the numerical condition is changed in order to obtain one measurement result, and the perturbation for each numerical condition in a plurality of measurements performed by the perimeter 1 is performed. A role as the basis of the reliability index is assigned to at least one of the numerical conditions in the storage unit 21 in which the examiner's answer is stored.
Then, the reliability index acquisition unit 23 refers to the subject's answer to the assigned numerical condition assigned by the assigning unit 22 from the storage unit 21 and obtains a reliability index for visual inspection based on the answer.
Note that the determination of the reliability may be performed by the determination unit further provided in the reliability index acquisition unit 23, or the reliability index may be displayed on the display unit 24 (for example, an external display).

As for the evaluation program, the control unit causes the computer to function as the following configuration.
A storage unit that stores a subject's response to each numerical condition in a plurality of measurements performed by the perimeter 1 by changing the numerical condition to obtain one measurement result for a predetermined part of the eye An assigning unit 22 that assigns a role as a reliability index base to at least one of the numerical conditions in 21
A reliability index acquisition unit 23 that refers to the subject's answer to the assigned numerical condition assigned by the assignment unit 22 from the storage unit 21 and obtains a reliability index for visual inspection based on the answer.

  The evaluation program for realizing each function is used by being installed in a computer. However, prior to the installation, the evaluation program may be provided by being stored in a computer-readable storage medium, or It may be provided through a communication line to be connected.

  As described above, each aspect of the present embodiment mainly includes each of the above-described configurations, but a known configuration may be appropriately adopted even if the configuration is other than that.

<4. Effects of the embodiment>
In the present embodiment, the following effects are mainly achieved.
In the present embodiment, an option is adopted in which measurement for reliability evaluation is not performed separately. That is, as a measurement for visual inspection, for a predetermined part of the eye, since the numerical condition was changed and the measurement was performed multiple times, any of the contents related to the multiple measurements already performed, Used later for reliability evaluation.

  In the past, there was only the idea of separating the measurement for visual inspection and the measurement for reliability evaluation from the beginning. On the other hand, in this embodiment, first, the perimeter 1 is used, and one numerical condition among the numerical conditions is obtained as a measurement result. In addition, a role as a reliability index base is assigned to at least one of the numerical conditions in a plurality of measurements that are already performed and stored in the storage unit 21 to evaluate reliability. We will use it later.

  By adopting the above-described configuration, for example, when a target is presented 200 to 500 times for one eye for one examination, it is added that several tens of times the target is presented. Can be avoided. Then, it is possible to shorten the time required for the entire visual inspection.

As a result, according to the present embodiment, the burden on the subject when evaluating the reliability of the visual inspection using the perimeter 1 can be reduced.
In addition, preferably, by displaying the reliability index in a graph as shown in FIG. 3, the examiner can intuitively grasp the reliability.

<5. Modified example>
The technical scope of the present invention is not limited to the above-described embodiments, but includes forms to which various changes and improvements are added within the scope of deriving specific effects obtained by constituent elements of the invention and combinations thereof.

  For example, in the above embodiment, the answer of the subject to the measurement is two choices of Yes / No, but the answer may be other than that. For example, a method may be employed in which an arbitrary character having a predetermined luminance is displayed on the display element in the head-mounted inspection apparatus exemplified above and the character is answered verbally. However, it is preferable to adopt some alternative method so that the subject can easily answer.

  In the above embodiment, the visual inspection device 20 (particularly the perimeter 1) has been described as a head-mounted inspection device. However, the present invention is not limited to this, and for example, a visual inspection is performed by displaying an inspection image on a screen or a display. You may apply to an inspection apparatus.

  In the above embodiment, one of the numerical conditions is the measurement result. However, when it is considered that there is a threshold between the numerical conditions (for example, the threshold is between the actually measured luminances 28 and 30). 29) may be used as the measurement result.

  In the above embodiment, the numerical condition other than the numerical value of the measurement result is adopted as the assigned numerical condition, but the numerical condition of the measurement result may be adopted. In this case, for example, if the numerical condition of the measurement result is used, the answer of Yes and No tends to be halved. Therefore, how much the response probability (reliability index) in FIG. Reliability may be determined (evaluated) based on this.

  Moreover, there is no limitation in particular in the part (namely, predetermined part of eyes) which shows a visual target with respect to a subject in the display element 12 in the perimeter 1. FIG. On the other hand, in the peripheral part of the display element 12 (that is, the peripheral part of the subject's visual field), the answer by the subject tends to be ambiguous. In other words, the center part of the display element 12 is easy to clarify the answer by the subject, and is suitable for evaluating the reliability of the measurement. Therefore, the numerical condition relating to the response of the subject when the target is presented in the center may be set as the assigned numerical condition.

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 ... Perimeter 21 ... Memory | storage part 22 ... Allocation part 23 ... Reliability index acquisition part 24 ... Display part 20 ... Visual inspection apparatus 30 ... Reliability evaluation system

Claims (8)

A perimeter that changes the numerical conditions and performs multiple measurements for a given part of the eye to obtain one measurement result;
A storage unit that stores a subject's answer to each numerical condition in the plurality of measurements,
An assigning unit that assigns a role as a basis for a reliability index for at least one of the numerical conditions related to the response of the subject stored in the storage unit;
A reliability index acquisition unit that obtains a reliability index for visual inspection based on the response by referring to the response of the subject to the assigned numerical condition allocated by the allocation unit from the storage unit;
A visual inspection device. A display unit that graphs and displays the reliability index obtained by the reliability index acquisition unit;
The visual inspection apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: The storage unit also stores a subject's answer to each numerical condition in the multiple measurements at other predetermined sites of the eye,
The reliability index acquisition unit is configured to send a test subject's answer to each of the assigned numerical conditions in each predetermined part of each eye stored in the storage unit, and the numerical value of the measurement result in each predetermined part of the eye. The visual inspection device according to claim 1, wherein a reliability index for the visual inspection is obtained by collecting according to a degree of separation of each of the assigned numerical values from the visual inspection. A method for evaluating the reliability of visual inspection using a perimeter,
As a basis for a reliability index for at least one of each numerical condition in multiple measurements performed by a perimeter while changing the numerical condition to obtain one measurement result for a predetermined part of the eye An assigning process to assign roles
A reliability index acquisition step of obtaining a reliability index for visual inspection based on the subject's answer to the allocation numerical condition allocated in the allocation step;
A reliability evaluation method comprising:   The reliability evaluation method according to claim 4, wherein the reliability index obtained in the reliability index acquisition step is displayed in a graph.   In the reliability index acquisition step, the subject's answer to each of the assigned numerical conditions in each predetermined part of each eye is set to a degree of separation of each of the assigned numerical conditions from each of the measured result values. The reliability evaluation method according to claim 4 or 5, wherein a reliability index for visual inspection is obtained by summarizing them accordingly. A reliability evaluation program for visual inspection using a perimeter,
For each predetermined part of the eye, each of the storage units storing the subject's answers to each numerical condition in multiple measurements performed by the perimeter while changing the numerical condition to obtain one measurement result An assigning unit that assigns a role as a basis of a reliability index to at least one of the numerical conditions;
A reliability index acquisition unit that obtains a reliability index for visual inspection based on the response by referring to the response of the subject to the assigned numerical condition allocated by the allocation unit from the storage unit,
A reliability evaluation program that makes a computer function as a computer. A reliability evaluation system for visual inspection using a perimeter,
For each predetermined part of the eye, each of the storage units storing the subject's answers to each numerical condition in multiple measurements performed by the perimeter while changing the numerical condition to obtain one measurement result An assigning unit that assigns a role as a basis of a reliability index to at least one of the numerical conditions;
A reliability index acquisition unit that obtains a reliability index for visual inspection based on the response by referring to the response of the subject to the assigned numerical condition allocated by the allocation unit from the storage unit;
A reliability evaluation system with