| Literature DB >> 29538425 |
Sachiko Udagawa1, Shinji Ohkubo1, Aiko Iwase2, Yuto Susuki3, Shiho Kunimatsu-Sanuki4, Takeo Fukuchi5, Chota Matsumoto6, Yuko Ohno3, Hiroshi Ono7, Kazuhisa Sugiyama1, Makoto Araie8.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Traffic accidents are associated with the visual function of drivers, as well as many other factors. Driving simulator systems have the advantage of controlling for traffic- and automobile-related conditions, and using pinhole glasses can control the degree of concentric concentration of the visual field. We evaluated the effect of concentric constriction of the visual field on automobile driving, using driving simulator tests.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29538425 PMCID: PMC5851605 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193767
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Visual field constriction by pinhole glasses.
Subjects with normal eyesight wore pinhole (PH) glasses with a 2 mm aperture that caused VF constriction. Of note, PH glasses with the same aperture can lead to a different level of VF constriction between individuals.
Fig 2PH glasses with variable apertures.
We developed PH glasses with variable apertures to create restricted visual fields.
Fig 3CLOCK CHART®.
The VF constrictions of 10° and 15° were created using a pinhole with variable apertures and a CLOCK CHART® displaying a ladybug and a caterpillar on the central 10°and 15°eccentricity, respectively.
Fig 4Screenshots of simulated scenarios.
The main test contained 8 scenarios depicting situations such as oncoming right-turning cars (A, B) and suddenly appearing hazards from the side in front of the car (C-H) Screenshots of the 8 scenarios: A. Oncoming right-turning blue car 1. B. Oncoming right-turning blue car 2. C. White car appearing from left. D. Red car appearing from right. E. Mobility scooter appearing from left. F. Blue car appearing from left. G. Mobility scooter appearing from right. H. Blue car appearing from right.
Subject characteristics.
| PH10 group (51 cases) | PH15 group (37 cases) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Demographic | |||
| Age (years), mean ± SD (range) | 48.6 ± 15.5 | 52.9 ± 15.8 | 0.344 |
| (23–75) | (23–78) | ||
| Gender (female/ male) | 23 / 28 | 14 / 23 | 0.086 |
| Right eye spherical equivalent refractive error (diopters), mean ± SD (range) | -2.5 ± 3.3 | -2.2 ± 1.3 | 0.916 |
| (-15.0 - +1.5) | (-7.8 - +1.9) | ||
| Left eye spherical equivalent refractive error (diopters), mean ± SD (range) | -2.3 ± 3.3 | -1.9 ± 2.6 | 0.829 |
| (-15.0 - +1.5) | (-7.8 - +2.3) | ||
| Driving characteristics | |||
| Driving history (years), mean ± SD (range) | 28.8 ± 15.2 | 31.8 ± 16.1 | 0.279 |
| (4–64) | (1–30) | ||
| Number of times driving per month (day), mean ± SD (range) | 24.3 ± 30.9 | 23.8 ± 9.5 | 0.177 |
| (1–30) | (1–30) | ||
| Time spent driving per day (minutes), mean ± SD (range) | 110.8 ± 132.3 | 120.9 ± 127.4 | 0.252 |
| (15–480) | (15–540) |
SD = standard deviation. Data are shown as mean ± standard deviation.
‡Mann–Whitney U test
†Fisher's exact test
Comparison of collisions between PH- and PH+.
| PH- (n = 88) | PH+ (n = 88) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oncoming right-turning vehicles (2 scenarios) | |||
| A. Oncoming right-turning blue car | 5 (5.7%) | 32 (36.4%) | <0.001 |
| B. Oncoming right-turning blue car | 6 (6.8%) | 33 (37.5%) | <0.001 |
| Suddenly appearing hazards from the side (6 scenarios) | |||
| C. White car approaching from the left | 5 (5.7%) | 74 (84.1%) | <0.001 |
| D. Red car approaching from the left | 3 (3.4%) | 84 (95.5%) | <0.001 |
| E. Mobility scooter approaching | 1 (1.1%) | 13 (14.8%) | 0.0012 |
| F. Blue car approaching from the left at an unmarked crossing | 3 (3.4%) | 56 (63.6%) | <0.001 |
| G. Mobility scooter approaching | 0 (0%) | 17 (19.3%) | <0.001 |
| H. Blue car approaching from the right crossing | 1 (1.1%) | 61 (69.3%) | <0.001 |
†Fisher's exact test
Comparison of collisions between PH10 and PH- in 51 subjects and between PH15 and PH- in 37 subjects.
| PH10 group | PH15 group | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PH- (n = 51) | PH+ (n = 51) | P value | PH- (n = 37) | PH- (n = 37) | P value | |
| Oncoming right-turning vehicles (2 scenarios) | ||||||
| A. Oncoming right-turning blue car | 3 (5.9%) | 18 (35.3%) | 0.002 | 2 (5.4%) | 14 (37.8%) | 0.0013 |
| B. Oncoming right-turning blue car | 2 (3.9%) | 23 (45.1%) | <0.001 | 4 (10.8%) | 10 (27.0%) | 0.1361 |
| Suddenly appearing hazards from the side (6 scenarios) | ||||||
| C. White car approaching from the left | 3 (5.9%) | 48 (94.1%) | <0.001 | 2 (5.4%) | 26 (70.3%) | <0.001 |
| D. Red car approaching from the left | 2 (3.9%) | 50 (98.0%) | <0.001 | 1 (2.7%) | 34 (91.9%) | <0.001† |
| E. Mobility scooter approaching from the left at an unmarked crossing | 0 (0%) | 11 (21.6%) | <0.001 | 1 (2.7%) | 2 (5.4%) | 1.000 |
| F. Blue car approaching from the left at an unmarked crossing | 2 (3.9%) | 35 (68.6%) | <0.001 | 1 (2.7%) | 21 (56.8%) | <0.001† |
| G. Mobility scooter approaching from the right | 0 (0%) | 16 (31.4%) | <0.001 | 0 (0%) | 1 (2.7%) | 1.000 |
| H. Blue car approaching from the right crossing | 0 (0%) | 33 (64.7%) | <0.001 | 1 (2.7%) | 28 (75.7%) | <0.001 |
†Fisher's exact test
Comparison of collisions in each scenario for both the PH10 and PH15 groups.
| PH10 group (n = 51) | PH15 group (n = 37) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oncoming right-turning vehicles | |||
| A. Oncoming right-turning blue car | 18 (37.8%) | 14 (37.8%) | 0.8529 |
| B. Oncoming right-turning blue car | 23 (45.1%) | 10 (27.0%) | 0.1184 |
| Suddenly appearing hazards from the side (6 scenarios) | |||
| C. White car approaching from the left | 48 (94.1%) | 26 (70.3%) | 0.0061 |
| D. Red car approaching from the left | 50 (98.0%) | 34 (91.9%) | 0.3054 |
| E. Mobility scooter approaching | 11 (21.6%) | 2 (5.4%) | 0.0646 |
| F. Blue car approaching from the left at an unmarked crossing | 35 (68.6%) | 21 (51.6%) | 0.2709 |
| G. Mobility scooter approaching | 16 (31.4%) | 1 (2.7%) | 0.0007 |
| H. Blue car approaching from the right crossing | 33 (64.7%) | 28 (64.7%) | 0.3507 |
†Fisher's exact test