Relationship between motor vehicle collisions and results of perimetry, useful field of view, and driving simulation in drivers with glaucoma

Journal Article (2015)
Author(s)

AJ Tatham (University of California, The University of Edinburgh)

E.R. Boer (TU Delft - Biomechatronics & Human-Machine Control, Entropy Control)

CPB Gracitelli (Federal University of São Paulo, University of California)

PN Rosen (University of California)

FA Medeiros (University of California)

Research Group
Biomechatronics & Human-Machine Control
Copyright
© 2015 AJ Tatham, E.R. Boer, CPB Gracitelli, PN Rosen, FA Medeiros
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1167/tvst.4.3.5
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2015
Language
English
Copyright
© 2015 AJ Tatham, E.R. Boer, CPB Gracitelli, PN Rosen, FA Medeiros
Research Group
Biomechatronics & Human-Machine Control
Issue number
3
Volume number
4
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Purpose: To examine the relationship between Motor Vehicle Collisions (MVCs) in
drivers with glaucoma and standard automated perimetry (SAP), Useful Field of View
(UFOV), and driving simulator assessment of divided attention.
Methods: A cross-sectional study of 153 drivers from the Diagnostic Innovations in
Glaucoma Study. All subjects had SAP and divided attention was assessed using UFOV
and driving simulation using low-, medium-, and high-contrast peripheral stimuli
presented during curve negotiation and car following tasks. Self-reported history of
MVCs and average mileage driven were recorded.
Results: Eighteen of 153 subjects (11.8%) reported a MVC. There was no difference in
visual acuity but the MVC group was older, drove fewer miles, and had worse
binocular SAP sensitivity, contrast sensitivity, and ability to divide attention (UFOV and
driving simulation). Low contrast driving simulator tasks were the best discriminators
of MVC (AUC 0.80 for curve negotiation versus 0.69 for binocular SAP and 0.59 for
UFOV). Adjusting for confounding factors, longer reaction times to driving simulator
divided attention tasks provided additional value compared with SAP and UFOV, with
a 1 standard deviation (SD) increase in reaction time (approximately 0.75 s) associated
with almost two-fold increased odds of MVC.
Conclusions: Reaction times to low contrast divided attention tasks during driving
simulation were significantly associated with history of MVC, performing better than
conventional perimetric tests and UFOV.
Translational Relevance: The association between conventional tests of visual
function and MVCs in drivers with glaucoma is weak, however, tests of divided
attention, particularly using driving simulation, may improve risk assessment.

Files

Boer.pdf
(pdf | 0.793 Mb)
Unspecified