Car driving performance in hemianopia: an on-road driving study

Knowing me, knowing you-A study on top-down requirements for compensatory scanning in drivers with homonymous visual field loss

OBJECTIVE

It is currently still unknown why some drivers with visual field loss can compensate well for their visual impairment while others adopt ineffective strategies. This paper contributes to the methodological investigation of the associated top-down mechanisms and aims at validating a theoretical model on the requirements for successful compensation among drivers with homonymous visual field loss.

METHODS

A driving simulator study was conducted with eight participants with homonymous visual field loss and eight participants with normal vision. Participants drove through an urban surrounding and experienced a baseline scenario and scenarios with visual precursors indicating increased likelihoods of crossing hazards. Novel measures for the assessment of the mental model of their visual abilities, the mental model of the driving scene and the perceived attention demand were developed and used to investigate the top-down mechanisms behind attention allocation and hazard avoidance.

RESULTS

Participants with an overestimation of their visual field size tended to prioritize their seeing side over their blind side both in subjective and objective measures. The mental model of the driving scene showed close relations to the subjective and actual attention allocation. While participants with homonymous visual field loss were less anticipatory in their usage of the visual precursors and showed poorer performances compared to participants with normal vision, the results indicate a stronger reliance on top-down mechanism for drivers with visual impairments. A subjective focus on the seeing side or on near peripheries more frequently led to bad performances in terms of collisions with crossing cyclists.

CONCLUSION

The study yielded promising indicators for the potential of novel measures to elucidate top-down mechanisms in drivers with homonymous visual field loss. Furthermore, the results largely support the model of requirements for successful compensatory scanning. The findings highlight the importance of individualized interventions and driver assistance systems tailored to address these mechanisms.

Comparison of visual requirements and regulations for obtaining a driving license in different European countries and some open questions on their adequacy

We reviewed the current state of knowledge regarding visual function and its suitability as part of medical examinations for driving licenses. We focused only on Group 1 drivers. According to previous studies, visual acuity, which is the most common test, is weakly associated with a higher risk of road accidents, with a greater role of visual field. The inclusion of the visual field test in medical examinations is therefore important, but the actual limit value is still unclear and further research in specific situations is needed. Color vision impairment was not found a threat to traffic safety. Contrast sensitivity decreases with age and is affected by abnormal eye conditions. Resulting glare can lead to an increased risk of traffic accidents during night driving in the elderly and others with conditions that impair contrast sensitivity. However, the universal cut-off limits have not been established either. The current European Union (EU) regulations therefore reflect minimum common denominator across the member states which may not entirely translate to optimal driving safety. Due to these open questions, standardized testing in simulators or on polygons that simulate real life conditions would be needed to better determine safe limits of visual function in different conditions. As there is a need to have better standardization across Europe regarding the requirements and rules regarding driving licenses in European countries, we first analyzed existing rules and compared them with each other, also in terms of deviations from the EU directive itself. We reviewed the literature in this field and prepared proposals for a more optimal regulation of the rules in the future. Particular attention is paid to the new method of examining the visual field that was created to respect the European directive. The paper can serve as a basis of information for research teams to design further protocols, as it gathers research findings to date on the importance and impact of various visual functions on driving safety, as well as a starting point for a debate on revising existing rules for obtaining and maintaining licenses, as it compares the current regulations in European countries and differences between them.

Vision Impairment and On-Road Driving

Good vision is important for safe driving. The impact of vision impairment associated with common eye diseases on driving performance, and the association between vision measures and driving performance, are discussed. Studies include those where participants drove a real vehicle on a closed road or on public roads. Closed-road studies include evaluation of both simulated and true vision impairment and day- and night-time driving. Collectively, the findings provide important insights into the impact of refractive conditions, cataracts, glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration, and hemianopic field loss on driving; however, study results show varying impacts on driving performance and are often limited by small sample sizes. Vision measures including motion sensitivity, contrast sensitivity, and useful field of view have stronger associations with driving performance than do visual acuity or visual fields, with studies suggesting that some drivers with field loss can compensate for their field defects through increased eye and head movements.

Driving With Hemianopia X: Effects of Cross Traffic on Gaze Behaviors and Pedestrian Responses at Intersections

Purpose

We conducted a driving simulator study to investigate the effects of monitoring intersection cross traffic on gaze behaviors and responses to pedestrians by drivers with hemianopic field loss (HFL).

Methods

Sixteen HFL and sixteen normal vision (NV) participants completed two drives in an urban environment. At 30 intersections, a pedestrian ran across the road when the participant entered the intersection, requiring a braking response to avoid a collision. Intersections with these pedestrian events had either (1) no cross traffic, (2) one approaching car from the side opposite the pedestrian location, or (3) two approaching cars, one from each side at the same time.

Results

Overall, HFL drivers made more (p < 0.001) and larger (p = 0.016) blind- than seeing-side scans and looked at the majority (>80%) of cross-traffic on both the blind and seeing sides. They made more numerous and larger gaze scans (p < 0.001) when they fixated cars on both sides (compared to one or no cars) and had lower rates of unsafe responses to blind- but not seeing-side pedestrians (interaction, p = 0.037). They were more likely to demonstrate compensatory blind-side fixation behaviors (faster time to fixate and longer fixation durations) when there was no car on the seeing side. Fixation behaviors and unsafe response rates were most similar to those of NV drivers when cars were fixated on both sides.

Conclusion

For HFL participants, making more scans, larger scans and safer responses to pedestrians crossing from the blind side were associated with looking at cross traffic from both directions. Thus, cross traffic might serve as a reminder to scan and provide a reference point to guide blind-side scanning of drivers with HFL. Proactively checking for cross-traffic cars from both sides could be an important safety practice for drivers with HFL.

Opportunities and Limitations of a Gaze-Contingent Display to Simulate Visual Field Loss in Driving Simulator Studies

Background

Research on task performance under visual field loss is often limited due to small and heterogenous samples. Simulations of visual impairments hold the potential to account for many of those challenges. Digitally altered pictures, glasses, and contact lenses with partial occlusions have been used in the past. One of the most promising methods is the use of a gaze-contingent display that occludes parts of the visual field according to the current gaze position. In this study, the gaze-contingent paradigm was implemented in a static driving simulator to simulate visual field loss and to evaluate parallels in the resulting driving and gaze behavior in comparison to patients.

Methods

The sample comprised 15 participants without visual impairment. All the subjects performed three drives: with full vision, simulated left-sided homonymous hemianopia, and simulated right-sided homonymous hemianopia, respectively. During each drive, the participants drove through an urban environment where they had to maneuver through intersections by crossing straight ahead, turning left, and turning right.

Results

The subjects reported reduced safety and increased workload levels during simulated visual field loss, which was reflected in reduced lane position stability and greater absence of large gaze movements. Initial compensatory strategies could be found concerning a dislocated gaze position and a distorted fixation ratio toward the blind side, which was more pronounced for right-sided visual field loss. During left-sided visual field loss, the participants showed a smaller horizontal range of gaze positions, longer fixation durations, and smaller saccadic amplitudes compared to right-sided homonymous hemianopia and, more distinctively, compared to normal vision.

Conclusion

The results largely mirror reports from driving and visual search tasks under simulated and pathological homonymous hemianopia concerning driving and scanning challenges, initially adopted compensatory strategies, and driving safety. This supports the notion that gaze-contingent displays can be a useful addendum to driving simulator research with visual impairments if the results are interpreted considering methodological limitations and inherent differences to the pathological impairment.

Benefits of Endogenous Spatial Attention During Visual Double-Training in Cortically-Blinded Fields

Recovery of visual discrimination thresholds inside cortically-blinded (CB) fields is most commonly attained at a single, trained location at a time, with iterative progress deeper into the blind field as performance improves over several months. As such, training is slow, inefficient, burdensome, and often frustrating for patients. Here, we investigated whether double-location training, coupled with a covert spatial-attention (SA) pre-cue, could improve the efficiency of training. Nine CB participants completed a randomized, training assignment with either a spatial attention or neutral pre-cue. All trained for a similar length of time on a fine direction discrimination task at two blind field locations simultaneously. Training stimuli and tasks for both cohorts were identical, save for the presence of a central pre-cue, to manipulate endogenous (voluntary) SA, or a Neutral pre-cue. Participants in the SA training cohort demonstrated marked improvements in direction discrimination thresholds, albeit not to normal/intact-field levels; participants in the Neutral training cohort remained impaired. Thus, double-training within cortically blind fields, when coupled with SA pre-cues can significantly improve direction discrimination thresholds at two locations simultaneously, offering a new method to improve performance and reduce the training burden for CB patients. Double-training without SA pre-cues revealed a hitherto unrecognized limitation of cortically-blind visual systems’ ability to improve while processing two stimuli simultaneously. These data could potentially explain why exposure to the typically complex visual environments encountered in everyday life is insufficient to induce visual recovery in CB patients. It is hoped that these new insights will direct both research and therapeutic developments toward methods that can attain better, faster recovery of vision in CB fields.

Predictive Value of the Esterman Visual Field Test on the Outcome of the On-Road Driving Test

Purpose

As the prevalence of age-related visual field disorders and the number of older drivers are rising, clear criteria on visual field requirements for driving are important. This article explores the predictive value of the Esterman visual field in relation to the outcome of an on-road driving test.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was performed for driver's license applicants who, based on their visual field, performed an on-road driving test. Cases (N = 101) with a failed on-road driving test were matched with 101 controls with a passed outcome. The Esterman visual field was divided in regions, and the number of points missed per region was counted. Logistic regression models and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were computed for each region.

Results

Most regions presented a significantly increased odds for failing the driving test when more points were missed. The odds ratio for the whole visual field was 2.52 (95% confidence interval, 1.53–4.14, P < 0.001) for all the participants. However, ROC curves failed to reveal distinct fail–pass criteria based on the number of points missed, as revealed by a large amount of overlap between cases and controls.

Conclusions

These findings confirm the relation between visual field damage and impaired driving performance. However, the Esterman visual field results were not conclusive for predicting the driving performance of the individual driver with visual field defects.

Translational Relevance

In our group of participants, the number of on-road driving tests cannot be further reduced by a more detailed definition of fail–pass criteria, based on the Esterman visual field test.

Return-to-driving following acquired brain injury: A neuropsychological perspective

BACKGROUND

Return to driving after an acquired brain injury (ABI) has been positively associated with return to employment, maintenance of social relationships, and engagement in recreational and other community activities. Safe driving involves multiple cognitive abilities in a dynamic environment, and cognitive dysfunction resulting from ABI can negatively impact driving performance.

OBJECTIVE

This manuscript examines the post-injury return-to-driving process, including performances on the in-office and on-road assessments, and the role of a rehabilitation neuropsychologist in helping patients resume driving.

METHOD

In this study, 39 of 200 individuals (approximately 20%) treated at an outpatient neurorehabilitation facility, who performed satisfactorily on a pre-driving cognitive screening, completed a behind-the-wheel driving test.

RESULTS

Of the 200 individuals, 34 (87%) passed the road test. Among the remaining five individuals who did not pass the road test, primary reasons for their failure included inability to follow or retain examiner directions primarily about lane position, speed, and vehicle control. The errors were attributable to cognitive difficulties with information processing, memory, attention regulation, and dual tasking.CONCLUSIONThe rehabilitation neuropsychologist contributed to the process by assessing cognition, facilitating self-awareness and error minimization, providing education about driving regulations and safety standards, and preparing for the road test and its outcomes.

The Impact of Visual Field Loss on Driving Skills: A Systematic Narrative Review

Purpose

To review the evidence on the impact of visual field loss on skills required for driving.

Methods

A literature search was undertaken using a systematic approach. Papers within scope were identified by two independent reviewers, and papers were grouped into similar themes for discussion.

Key findings

Evidence suggests that both binocular and monocular visual field defects have a negative impact on driving skills. Both central and peripheral cause difficulties, but the degree of impact is dependent on the defect severity and compensation ability. Many factors that affect compensation to visual field loss and the effects of visual field loss on driving skills are discussed, including cognitive status, age and duration of visual field loss. In summary, in central visual field loss compensation, strategies include reduction of overall driving speed; whereas, in peripheral field loss, increased scanning is reported to aid adaptation.

Conclusions

For driving, there is evidence that complete and/or binocular visual field loss poses more of a difficulty than partial and/or monocular loss, and central defects cause more problems than peripheral defects. A lack of evidence exists concerning the impact of superior versus inferior defects. The level of peripheral vision loss that is incompatible with safe driving remains unknown, as compensation abilities vary widely between individuals. This review highlights a lack of evidence in relation to the impact of visual field loss on driving skills. Further research is required to strengthen the evidence to allow clinicians to better support people with visual field loss with driving advice.

Agreement of driving simulator and on-road driving performance in patients with binocular visual field loss

PURPOSE

On-road testing is considered the standard for assessment of driving performance; however, it lacks standardization. In contrast, driving simulators provide controlled experimental settings in a virtual reality environment. This study compares both testing conditions in patients with binocular visual field defects due to bilateral glaucomatous optic neuropathy or due to retro-chiasmal visual pathway lesions.

METHODS

Ten glaucoma patients (PG), ten patients with homonymous visual field defects (PH), and 20 age- and gender-matched ophthalmologically normal control subjects (CG and CH, respectively) participated in a 40-min on-road driving task using a dual brake vehicle. A subset of this sample (8 PG, 8 PH, 8 CG, and 7 CH) underwent a subsequent driving simulator test of similar duration. For both settings, pass/fail rates were assessed by a masked driving instructor.

RESULTS

For on-road driving, hemianopia patients (PH) and glaucoma patients (PG) showed worse performance than their controls (CH and CG groups): PH 40%, CH 30%, PG 60%, CG 0%, failure rate. Similar results were obtained for the driving simulator test: PH 50%, CH 29%, PG 38%, CG 0%, failure rate. Twenty-four out of 31 participants (77%) showed concordant results with regard to pass/fail under both test conditions (p > 0.05; McNemar test).

CONCLUSIONS

Driving simulator testing leads to results comparable to on-road driving, in terms of pass/fail rates in subjects with binocular (glaucomatous or retro-chiasmal lesion-induced) visual field defects. Driving simulator testing seems to be a well-standardized method, appropriate for assessment of driving performance in individuals with binocular visual field loss.

Key factors for the bicycle use of visually impaired people: a Delphi study

Purpose: This study aims to identify the most important factors that influence the independent bicycle use of visually impaired people in the Netherlands.Materials and methods: Both visually impaired people and professionals participated in a two-round online Delphi study (n = 42). In Round 1 the participants identified the factors which they ranked by relevance in Round 2.Results: The participants prioritised environmental factors related to the traffic situation, the characteristics of the infrastructure, and weather and light conditions (Kendall's W = 0.66). They indicated that the most influencing personal factors are related to personality, traffic experience, and personal background (W = 0.58). Glaucoma was ranked as the most relevant ophthalmic condition (W = 0.74), while glare was regarded as the most important factor with respect to the visual functions (W = 0.78).Conclusions: The factors provided by this study can be used to optimise the independent cycling mobility of visually impaired people. More research is needed to investigate, both, how and to what extent the mentioned factors influence the cycling behaviour.Implications for rehabilitationThe results of this study can be used to set priorities during the rehabilitation and training of visually impaired people who wish to cycle independently.Visually impaired cyclists may compensate for the consequences of their visual impairments by taking alternative routes that suit their individual abilities and limitations.Since gaining and maintaining self-confidence is important for independent cycling with a visual impairment, practitioners such as mobility trainers should not only focus on cycling-related skills and abilities, but also aim to improve the self-confidence of visually impaired people who wish to cycle.

Driving with homonymous visual field loss: a review of the literature

Driving is an important rehabilitation goal for patients with homonymous field defects (HFDs); however, whether or not people with HFDs should be permitted to drive is not clear. Over the last 15 years, there has been a marked increase in the number of studies evaluating the effects of HFDs on driving performance. This review of the literature provides a much-needed summary for practitioners and researchers, addressing the following topics: regulations pertaining to driving with HFDs, self-reported driving difficulties, pass rates in on-road tests, the effects of HFDs on lane position and steering stability, the effects of HFDs on scanning and detection of potential hazards, screening for potential fitness to drive, evaluating practical fitness to drive and the efficacy of interventions to improve driving of persons with HFDs. Although there is clear evidence from on-road studies that some people with HFDs may be rated as safe to drive, others are reported to have significant deficits in skills important for safe driving, including taking a lane position too close to one side of the travel lane, unstable steering and inadequate viewing (scanning) behaviour. Driving simulator studies have provided strong evidence of a wide range in compensatory scanning abilities and detection performance, despite similar amounts of visual field loss. Conventional measurements of visual field extent (in which eye movements are not permitted) do not measure such compensatory abilities and are not predictive of on-road driving performance. Thus, there is a need to develop better tests to screen people with HFDs for visual fitness to drive. We are not yet at a point where we can predict which HFD patient is likely to be a safe driver. Therefore, it seems only fair to provide an opportunity for individualised assessments of practical fitness to drive either on the road and/or in a driving simulator.

Motor Vehicle Collision Involvement among Persons with Hemianopia and Quadrantanopia

Persons with homonymous quadrantanopia and hemianopia experience driving restrictions, yet there is little scientific evidence to support driving prohibition among persons with these conditions. This retrospective cohort study compares motor vehicle collision (MVC) rates among 27 current licensed drivers with hemianopic and quadrantanopic field defects, who were ≥6 months from the brain injury date with that of 27 age-matched drivers with normal visual fields. Information regarding all police-reported MVCs that occurred over a period of nine years was obtained. MVC rates per year and per mile travelled were calculated and compared using conditional Poisson regression. Drivers with hemianopia or quadrantanopia had more MVCs per mile driven compared to drivers with normal visual fields; specifically their overall MVC rate was 2.45-times (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89–3.95) higher and their at-fault MVC rate was 2.64-times (95% CI 1.03–6.80) higher. This study indicates that drivers with hemianopia or quadrantanopia have elevated MVC rates. This is consistent with previous research despite studies showing wide individual variability from excellent to poor driving skills. Future research should focus on the functional and driving performance characteristics associated with superior driving skills and/or those that may be amenable to improvement via behavioral and/or engineering interventions.