Person:

Goldstein, Robert

Purpose Peripheral prisms (p-prisms) shift peripheral portions of the visual field of one eye, providing visual field expansion for patients with hemianopia. However, patients rarely show adaption to the shift, incorrectly localizing objects viewed within the p-prisms. A pilot evaluation of a novel computerized perceptual-motor training program aiming to promote p-prism adaption was conducted. Methods: Thirteen patients with hemianopia fitted with 57Δ oblique p-prisms completed the training protocol. They attended six 1-hour visits reaching and touching peripheral checkerboard stimuli presented over videos of driving scenes while fixating a central target. Performance was measured at each visit and after 3 months. Results: There was a significant reduction in touch error (P = 0.01) for p-prism zone stimuli from pretraining median of 16.6° (IQR 12.1°–19.6°) to 2.7° ( IQR 1.0°–8.5°) at the end of training. P-prism zone reaction times did not change significantly with training (P > 0.05). P-prism zone detection improved significantly (P = 0.01) from a pretraining median 70% (IQR 50%–88%) to 95% at the end of training (IQR 73%–98%). Three months after training improvements had regressed but performance was still better than pretraining. Conclusions: Improved pointing accuracy for stimuli detected in prism-expanded vision of patients with hemianopia wearing 57Δ oblique p-prisms is possible and training appears to further improve detection. Translational Relevance This is the first use of this novel software to train adaptation of visual direction in patients with hemianopia wearing peripheral prisms.

We determined whether binocular central scotomas above or below the preferred retinal locus affect detection of hazards (pedestrians) approaching from the side. Seven participants with central field loss (CFL), and seven age-and sex-matched controls with normal vision (NV), each completed two sessions of 5 test drives (each approximately 10 minutes long) in a driving simulator. Participants pressed the horn when detecting pedestrians that appeared at one of four eccentricities (-14°, -4°, left, 4°, or 14°, right, relative to car heading). Pedestrians walked or ran towards the travel lane on a collision course with the participant’s vehicle, thus remaining in the same area of the visual field, assuming participant's steady forward gaze down the travel lane. Detection rates were nearly 100% for all participants. CFL participant reaction times were longer (median 2.27s, 95% CI 2.13 to 2.47) than NVs (median 1.17s, 95%CI 1.10 to 2.13; difference p<0.01), and CFL participants would have been unable to stop for 21% of pedestrians, compared with 3% for NV, p<0.001. Although the scotomas were not expected to obscure pedestrian hazards, gaze tracking revealed that scotomas did sometimes interfere with detection; late reactions usually occurred when pedestrians were entirely or partially obscured by the scotoma (time obscured correlated with reaction times, r = 0.57, p<0.001). We previously showed that scotomas lateral to the preferred retinal locus delay reaction times to a greater extent; however, taken together, the results of our studies suggest that any binocular CFL might negatively impact timely hazard detection while driving and should be a consideration when evaluating vision for driving.

Purpose We investigated whether people with homonymous hemianopia (HH) were able to spontaneously (without training or instructions) adapt their blind-side scan magnitudes in response to differing scanning requirements for detection of pedestrians in a driving simulator when differing cues about pedestrian eccentricities and movement behaviors were available in the seeing hemifield. Methods: Twelve HH participants completed two sessions in a driving simulator pressing the horn when they detected a pedestrian. Stationary pedestrians outside the driving lane were presented in one session and approaching pedestrians on a collision course in the other. Gaze data were analyzed for pedestrians initially appearing at approximately 14° in the blind hemifield. No instructions were given regarding scanning. Results: After appearing, the stationary pedestrians' eccentricity increased rapidly to a median of 31° after 2.5 seconds, requiring increasingly larger blind-side gaze scans for detection, while the approaching pedestrians' eccentricity remained constant at approximately 14°, requiring a more moderate scan (∼14°) for detection. Although median scan magnitudes did not differ between the two conditions (approaching: 14° [IQR 9°–15°]; stationary: 13° [IQR 9°–20°]; P = 0.43), three participants showed evidence of adapting (increasing) their blind-side scan magnitudes in the stationary condition. Conclusions: Three participants (25%) appeared to be able to apply voluntary cognitive control to modify their blind-side gaze scanning in response to the differing scanning requirements of the two conditions without explicit training. Translational Relevance Our results suggest that only a minority of people with hemianopia are likely to be able to spontaneously adapt their blind-side scanning in response to rapidly changing and unpredictable situations in on-road driving.

Purpose Drivers with homonymous hemianopia (HH) were previously found to have impaired detection of blind-side hazards, yet in many jurisdictions they may obtain a license. We evaluated whether oblique 57Δ peripheral prisms (p-prisms) and perceptual-motor training improved blind-side detection rates. Methods: Patients with HH (n = 11) wore p-prisms for 2 weeks and then received perceptual-motor training (six visits) detecting and touching stimuli in the prism-expanded vision. In a driving simulator, patients drove and pressed the horn upon detection of pedestrians who ran toward the roadway (26 from each side): (1) without p-prisms at baseline; (2) with p-prisms after 2 weeks acclimation but before training; (3) with p-prisms after training; and (4) 3 months later. Results: P-prisms improved blind-side detection from 42% to 56%, which further improved after training to 72% (all P < 0.001). Blind-side timely responses (adequate time to have stopped) improved from 31% without to 44% with p-prisms (P < 0.001) and further improved with training to 55% (P = 0.02). At the 3-month follow-up, improvements from training were maintained for detection (65%; P = 0.02) but not timely responses (P = 0.725). There was wide between-subject variability in baseline detection performance and response to p-prisms. There were no negative effects of p-prisms on vehicle control or seeing-side performance. Conclusions: P-prisms improved detection with no negative effects, and training may provide additional benefit. Translational Relevance In jurisdictions where people with HH are legally driving, these data aid in clinical decision making by providing evidence that p-prisms improve performance without negative effects.