BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to develop a fast and efficient electrophysiological protocol to examine the visual field's integrity, which would be useful in pediatric testing. METHODS: Steady-state visual-evoked potentials (ssVEPs) to field-specific radial checkerboards flickering at two cycle frequencies (7.5 and 6 Hz for central and peripheral stimulations, respectively) recorded at Oz were collected from 22 participants from 5 to 34 years old and from 5 visually impaired adolescents (12-16 years old). Responses from additional leads (POz, O1, O2), and the impact of gaze deviation on the signals, were also investigated in a subgroup of participants. RESULTS: Steady-state visual-evoked potentials responses were similar at all electrode sites, although the signal from the central stimulation was significantly higher at Oz and was highly sensitive in detecting gaze deviation. No effect of age or sex was found, indicating similar ssVEP responses between adults and healthy children. Visual acuity was related to the central signal when comparing healthy participants with four central visual impaired adolescents. Clinical validation of our electrophysiological protocol was also achieved in a 15-year-old adolescent with a severe peripheral visual deficit, as assessed with Goldmann perimetry. CONCLUSIONS: A single electrode over Oz is sufficient to gather both central and peripheral visual signals and also to control for gaze deviation. Our method presents several advantages in evaluating visual fields integrity, as it is fast, reliable, and efficient, and applicable in children as young as 5 years old. However, a larger sample of healthy children should be tested to establish clinical norms.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to develop a fast and efficient electrophysiological protocol to examine the visual field's integrity, which would be useful in pediatric testing. METHODS: Steady-state visual-evoked potentials (ssVEPs) to field-specific radial checkerboards flickering at two cycle frequencies (7.5 and 6 Hz for central and peripheral stimulations, respectively) recorded at Oz were collected from 22 participants from 5 to 34 years old and from 5 visually impaired adolescents (12-16 years old). Responses from additional leads (POz, O1, O2), and the impact of gaze deviation on the signals, were also investigated in a subgroup of participants. RESULTS: Steady-state visual-evoked potentials responses were similar at all electrode sites, although the signal from the central stimulation was significantly higher at Oz and was highly sensitive in detecting gaze deviation. No effect of age or sex was found, indicating similar ssVEP responses between adults and healthy children. Visual acuity was related to the central signal when comparing healthy participants with four central visual impaired adolescents. Clinical validation of our electrophysiological protocol was also achieved in a 15-year-old adolescent with a severe peripheral visual deficit, as assessed with Goldmann perimetry. CONCLUSIONS: A single electrode over Oz is sufficient to gather both central and peripheral visual signals and also to control for gaze deviation. Our method presents several advantages in evaluating visual fields integrity, as it is fast, reliable, and efficient, and applicable in children as young as 5 years old. However, a larger sample of healthy children should be tested to establish clinical norms.