| Literature DB >> 26339215 |
Chaoying S Xu1, Jessica S Chen1, Ron A Adelman1.
Abstract
Video games have surged in popularity due to their entertainment factor and, with recent innovation, their use in health care. This review explores the dual facets of video games in treating vision impairment in amblyopia as well as their potential for overuse and addiction. Specifically, this review examines video game addiction from a biopsychosocial perspective and relates the addictive qualities of video games with their use as a therapeutic treatment for amblyopia. Current literature supports both the identification of video game addiction as a disease, as well as the therapeutic potential of video games in clinical trials. We show the need for clinicians to be aware of the dangers associated with video game overuse and the need for future studies to examine the risks associated with their health care benefits.Entities:
Keywords: Internet gaming; addiction; amblyopia; online gaming; video games
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26339215 PMCID: PMC4553652
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Yale J Biol Med ISSN: 0044-0086
Figure 1Best-selling video games in 2013 by genre in America as published by Entertainment Software Association [1].
Figure 2Three prevailing criteria for video game addiction. Core Components of Video Game Addiction includes the six basic components of addiction. The DSM-5’s Internet Gaming Disorder definition includes three additional criteria, and finally the Game Addiction Scale is the most inclusive scale with a 21-item questionnaire. Adaped from [14-16].
Summary of clinical trials examining the therapeutic effect of video games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Li et al. (2011) [ | Cross-over study | 20 | 15-61 | Monocular | Action game: Medal of Honor® (40-80h) and/or non-action game: Simcity® (40h) | Intervention vs 20 h of other visual activities (e.g. watch TV, read) after cross-over | Average improvement of visual acuity by 1.6 lines, positional acuity by 16%, spatial acuity by 37% and stereopsis 54% | Unbalanced sample size among groups, small sample size, lacks randomization |
| Waddingham et al. (2006) [ | Non-randomized trial | 6 | 5-7 | Binocular | Watch movie and play video games on I-BiT system® (3-7h) ‡ | Pre- vs post-intervention | Average improvement of visual acuity by 3.25 lines in 5/6 patients | Small sample size, lacks control |
| Cleary et al. (2009) [ | Non-randomized trial | 12 | 6-11 | Binocular | Watch movie and play a racing game on I-BiT system® (4h) ‡ | Pre- vs post-intervention | Improvement in visual acuity by at least 1 line in 7/12 patients | Small sample size, lacks control |
| Herbison et al. (2013) [ | Non-randomized trial | 10 | 4-8 | Binocular | Watch movie and play video games on I-BiT system® (3h) ‡ | Pre- vs post-intervention | Average visual acuity improvement of 1.3 lines in 6/9 patients | Small sample size, lacks control |
| Knox et al. (2012) [ | Non-randomized trial | 14 | 5-14 | Binocular | Tetris® on head-mounted video goggles (5h) | Pre- vs post-intervention | Improvement in visual acuity by at leasts 1 line in 6/14 patients, and in stereopsis in 3/14 patients | Small sample size, lacks control |
| Li et al. (2013) [ | Cross-over study | 18 | 21-31 | Binocular | Tetris® on head-mounted video goggles (10h) | Binocular vs monocular game play (patching) | Improvement in visual acuity and stereopsis (binocular> monocular game play) | Small sample size, lacks randomization |
| Spiegel et al. (2013) [ | Sham-controlled, cross-over, double-blind study | 16 | 18-31 | Binocular | Tetris® on iPod touch with lenticular screen (11h) ± adjunct therapy with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of visual cortex | Patients with vs without adjunct therapy after cross-over | Average improvement of visual acuity by 3 line and stereopsis. Additional improvement in stereoacuity with adjunct therapy | Unclear randomization process, small sample size |
| Hess et al. (2014) [ | Non-randomized trial | 14 | 13-50 | Binocular | Tetris on iPod touch with lenticular screen (10-30h) | Pre- vs post-intervention | Average improvement of visual acuity by 1.1 lines and stereopsis in 13/14 patients | Small sample size, lacks control |
| Li et al. (2015) [ | Non-randomized trial | 30 | 18-31 | Binocular | Tetriscon iPod touch with lenticular screen (10-30h) with adjunct therapy with tDCS or on head-mounted video goggles (10h) | Pre- vs post-intervention | Improvement in contrast sensitivity across all spatial frequencies | Lacks randomization |
| Vedamurthy et al. (2015) [ | Non-randomized trial | 23 | 19-62 | Binocular | Tailored action game: Unreal Tournament® video game (40h) | Pre- vs post-intervention | Improvement in visual acuity by at least 1 line in 17/23 patients and in stereopsis in 9/23 patients | Small sample size, lacks control |
Note: PubMed database was searched up to February 2015 using the keywords “video game and amblyopia” and “computer game and amblyopia.” To be included, the study used video game as a treatment for patients with confirmed diagnosis of amblyopia. *Visual acuity were measured using LogMAR crowded Keeler chart. ‡Interactive Binocular Treatment (I-BiT®): patient views 3D images through 3D shutter glasses on a monitor.