Issue: March 2014
October 24, 2013
1 min read
Save

New test effective for evaluating performance of drivers with field loss

Issue: March 2014
You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com.

SEATTLE – A new functional perimetry test based on video recordings of a driving simulator appeared to be simple, inexpensive and repeatable for measuring detection deficits in patients with visual field loss, according to a presenter here at the American Academy of Optometry annual meeting.

The driving simulator tested patients’ ability to detect pedestrians walking out into the road and was sensitive to measuring detection deficits in patients with visual field loss, Alex Bowers, MCOptom, PhD, FAAO, told attendees.

“But obviously, a test like [the driving simulator] is not suitable for regular clinic implementation, due to high costs, the need for specialists to operate it and also the motion sickness some of the users experience while in the simulator,” Bowers said.

“So, for this version, we developed a simpler version of the test,” she said.

Video capture from sessions in the driving simulator program were edited into 3-minute clips and shown to 13 patients with homonymous visual field loss. Each patient was measured for detection rate and reaction time for acknowledging pedestrians entering the road in front of them. These results were compared to results from the same patients performing the same detection tasks in the driving simulator. Free eye movements were permitted.

Bowers and colleagues found that, on the blind side of the patients, detection rates were lower (P =.012) and reaction times significantly longer (P = .005) than on the seeing side in the video. They also found that better detection performance on the video test was associated with better detection performance in the simulator (P = .002).

“Even though it was much simpler than the driving simulator test, we were still able to capture that amazing range between subject differences and abilities to compensate for their vision loss. And more importantly, it was predictive of detection performance in the more complex tasks,” Bowers said.

“It’s a small sample, but the results are promising,” she said.