PURPOSE: In this study, we investigated whether an individual's visual fatigue can be evaluated objectively and quantitatively from their ability to maintain binocular fusion. METHODS: Binocular fusion maintenance (BFM) was measured using a custom-made binocular open-view Shack-Hartmann wavefront aberrometer equipped with liquid crystal shutters, wherein eye movements and wavefront aberrations were measured simultaneously. Transmittance in the liquid crystal shutter in front of the subject's nondominant eye was reduced linearly, and BFM was determined from the transmittance at the point when binocular fusion was broken and vergence eye movement was induced. In total, 40 healthy subjects underwent the BFM test and completed a questionnaire regarding subjective symptoms before and after a visual task lasting 30 minutes. RESULTS: BFM was significantly reduced after the visual task (P < 0.001) and was negatively correlated with the total subjective eye symptom score (adjusted R2 = 0.752, P < 0.001). Furthermore, the diagnostic accuracy for visual fatigue was significantly higher in BFM than in the conventional test results (aggregated fusional vergence range, near point of convergence, and the high-frequency component of accommodative microfluctuations; P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that BFM can be used as an indicator for evaluating visual fatigue. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: BFM can be used to evaluate the visual fatigue caused by the new visual devices, such as head-mount display, objectively.
PURPOSE: In this study, we investigated whether an individual's visual fatigue can be evaluated objectively and quantitatively from their ability to maintain binocular fusion. METHODS: Binocular fusion maintenance (BFM) was measured using a custom-made binocular open-view Shack-Hartmann wavefront aberrometer equipped with liquid crystal shutters, wherein eye movements and wavefront aberrations were measured simultaneously. Transmittance in the liquid crystal shutter in front of the subject's nondominant eye was reduced linearly, and BFM was determined from the transmittance at the point when binocular fusion was broken and vergence eye movement was induced. In total, 40 healthy subjects underwent the BFM test and completed a questionnaire regarding subjective symptoms before and after a visual task lasting 30 minutes. RESULTS: BFM was significantly reduced after the visual task (P < 0.001) and was negatively correlated with the total subjective eye symptom score (adjusted R2 = 0.752, P < 0.001). Furthermore, the diagnostic accuracy for visual fatigue was significantly higher in BFM than in the conventional test results (aggregated fusional vergence range, near point of convergence, and the high-frequency component of accommodative microfluctuations; P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that BFM can be used as an indicator for evaluating visual fatigue. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: BFM can be used to evaluate the visual fatigue caused by the new visual devices, such as head-mount display, objectively.