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.
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.
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).
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Kulkarni KM, Mayer JR, Lorenzana LL, Myers JS, Spaeth GL (2012) Visual field staging systems in glaucoma and the activities of daily living. Am J Ophthalmol 154:445–451
Silveira S, Jolly N, Heard R, Clunas NJ, Kay L (2007) Current licensing authority standards for peripheral visual field and safe on-road senior aged automobile driving performance. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 35:612–620
DeLaey JJ, Colenbrander A (2006) Visual standards: Vision requirements for driving safety with emphasis on individual assessment www.icoph.org/pdf/visionfordriving.pdf. Assessed 18 June 2018
Kasneci E, Sippel K, Aehling K et al (2014) Driving with binocular visual field loss? A study on a supervised on-road parcours with simultaneous eye and head tracking. PLoS One 9:e87470
de Haan GA, Melis-Dankers BJM, Brouwer WH, Bredewoud RA, Tucha O, Heutink J (2014) Car driving performance in hemianopia: an-on road driving study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 55:6482–6489
Wood JM, McGwin G Jr, Elgin J, Vaphiades MS, Braswell RA, DeCarlo DK et al (2011) Hemianopic and quadrantanopic field loss, eye and head movements, and driving. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 52:1220–1225
Papageorgiou E, Hardiess G, Ackermann H, Wiethoelter H, Dietz K, Mallot HA et al (2012) Collision avoidance in persons with homonymous visual field defects under virtual reality conditions. Vis Res 52:20–30
Kübler TC, Kasneci E, Rosenstiel W, Heister M, Aehling K, Nagel K et al (2015) Driving with glaucoma: task performance and gaze movements. Optom Vis Sci 92:1037–1046
Bedard M, Parkkari M, Weaver B, Riendeau J, Dahlquist M (2010) Brief report-assessment of driving performance using a simulator protocol: validity and reproducibility. Am J Occup Ther 64:336–340
Eramudugolla R, Price J, Chopra S, Li X, Anstey KJ (2016) Comparison of a virtual older driver assessment with an on-road driving test. J Am Geriatr Soc 64:253–258
Törnros J (1998) Driving behaviour in a real and a simulated road tunnel—a validation study. Accid Anal Prev 30:497–503
Blana E, Golias J (2002) Differences between vehicle lateral displacement on the road and in a fixed-base simulator. Hum Factors 44:303–313
Devos H, Akinwuntan AE, Nieuwboer A, Tant M, Truijen S, De Wit L et al (2009) Comparison of the effect of two driving retraining programs on on-road performance after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 23:699–705
Fuermaier ABM, Piersma D, de Waard D, Davidse RJ, de Groot J, Doumen MJA et al (2017) Assessing fitness to drive—a validation study on patients with mild cognitive impairment. Traffic Inj Prev 18:145–149
Freund B, Gravenstein S, Ferris R, Shaheen E (2002) Evaluating driving performance of cognitively impaired and healthy older adults: a pilot study comparing on-road testing and driving simulation. J Am Geriatr Soc 50:1309–1310
Piersma D, Fuermaier ABM, de Waard D, Davidse RJ, de Groot J, Doumen MJA et al (2016) Prediction of fitness to drive in patients with Alzheimer’s dementia. PLoS One 11:e0149566
Keller M, Kesselring J, Hiltbrunner B (2003) Fitness to drive with neurological disabilities. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 17:168–175
Lundqvist A, Gerdle B, Rönnberg J (2000) Neuropsychological aspects of driving after a stroke—in the simulator and on the road. Appl Cogn Psychol 14:135–150
Kübler TC, Kasneci E, Rosenstiel W, Aehling K, Heister M, Nagel K et al (2015) Driving with homonymous visual field defects: driving performance and compensatory gaze movements. J Eye Mov Res 5:1–11
Hird MA, Vetivelu A, Saposnik G, Schweizer TA (2014) Cognitive, on-road, and simulator-based driving assessment after stroke. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 23:2654–2670
Shechtman O, Classen S, Awadzi K, Mann W (2009) Comparison of driving errors between on-the-road and simulated driving assessment: a validation study. Traffic Inj Prev 10:379–385
Coeckelbergh TRM (2002) The effect of visual field defects on driving performance: a driving simulator study. Arch Ophthalmol 120:1509
Szlyk JP, Mahler CL, Seiple W, Edward DP, Wilensky JT (2005) Driving performance of glaucoma patients correlates with peripheral visual field loss. J Glaucoma 14:145–150
Gracitelli CPB, Tatham AJ, Boer ER, Abe RY, Diniz-Filho A, Rosen PN et al (2015) Predicting risk of motor vehicle collisions in patients with glaucoma: a longitudinal study. PLoS One 10:e0138288
Szlyk JP, Pizzimenti CE, Fishman GA, Kelsch R, Wetzel LC, Kagan S et al (1995) A comparison of driving in older subjects with and without age-related macular degeneration. Arch Ophthalmol 113:1033–1040
Ball K, Owsley C (1993) The useful field of view test: a new technique for evaluating age-related declines in visual function. J Am Optom Assoc 64:71–79
The authors are grateful to Mr. Helmut Hanne, driving school Hanne, Tübingen/FRG, for evaluating the drivers’ performances and to the FZI, Karlsruhe/FRG, for providing the dual brake vehicle.
Katja Nagel, Daimler AG, Research and Development, Driving Simulators, Workshops & Testing RD/FFS, 059-HPC X820, D-71059 Sindelfingen/Germany.
Ulrich Schiefer, Study course Ophthalmic Optics, University of Applied Sciences, Aalen, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
This study was funded by PFIZER Pharma GmbH, Berlin, Germany, and to MSD, MERCK, SHARP and DOHME GmbH, Haar/Germany. This funding was used for compensation of the recruited subjects. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
The research study was approved by the Independent Ethics Committee of the University of Tübingen and was performed according to the Declaration of Helsinki. Following verbal and written explanation of the experimental protocol, all patients gave their written consent, with the option of withdrawing from the study at any time.
Conflict of interest
Judith Ungewiss declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Thomas Kübler declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Katrin Sippel declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Kathrin Aehling declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Martin Heister declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Wolfgang Rosenstiel declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Enkelejda Kasneci declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Eleni Papageorgiou declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Katja Nagel declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Ulrich Schiefer is a consultant of the HAAG-STREIT Inc., Köniz, Switzerland. He has received personal fees for invited lectures by several pharmaceutical companies, including MSD (MERCK, SHARP & DOHME GmbH), Haar/Germany and PFIZER Pharma GmbH, Berlin, Germany.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov.
Unique identifiers: NCT 01372319, NTC01372332
Electronic supplementary material
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ungewiss, J., Kübler, T., Sippel, K. et al. Agreement of driving simulator and on-road driving performance in patients with binocular visual field loss. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 256, 2429–2435 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-018-4148-9
- On-road driving
- Driving simulator
- Homonymous hemianopia