Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Aug 30:9:286.
doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2017.00286. eCollection 2017.

Effect of Cognitive Demand on Functional Visual Field Performance in Senior Drivers with Glaucoma

Affiliations

Effect of Cognitive Demand on Functional Visual Field Performance in Senior Drivers with Glaucoma

Viswa Gangeddula et al. Front Aging Neurosci. .

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the effect of cognitive demand on functional visual field performance in drivers with glaucoma. Method: This study included 20 drivers with open-angle glaucoma and 13 age- and sex-matched controls. Visual field performance was evaluated under different degrees of cognitive demand: a static visual field condition (C1), dynamic visual field condition (C2), and dynamic visual field condition with active driving (C3) using an interactive, desktop driving simulator. The number of correct responses (accuracy) and response times on the visual field task were compared between groups and between conditions using Kruskal-Wallis tests. General linear models were employed to compare cognitive workload, recorded in real-time through pupillometry, between groups and conditions. Results: Adding cognitive demand (C2 and C3) to the static visual field test (C1) adversely affected accuracy and response times, in both groups (p < 0.05). However, drivers with glaucoma performed worse than did control drivers when the static condition changed to a dynamic condition [C2 vs. C1 accuracy; glaucoma: median difference (Q1-Q3) 3 (2-6.50) vs.

Controls: 2 (0.50-2.50); p = 0.05] and to a dynamic condition with active driving [C3 vs. C1 accuracy; glaucoma: 2 (2-6) vs.

Controls: 1 (0.50-2); p = 0.02]. Overall, drivers with glaucoma exhibited greater cognitive workload than controls (p = 0.02). Conclusion: Cognitive demand disproportionately affects functional visual field performance in drivers with glaucoma. Our results may inform the development of a performance-based visual field test for drivers with glaucoma.

Keywords: cognition; driving; elderly; glaucoma; psychomotor.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Low-fidelity driving simulator (STISIM drive).
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
(A–C) Three different visual field conditions used in the study.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Visual field targets expanding 100° of horizontal field of view and 20° of vertical field of view.
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Mean and standard deviations for cognitive workload between the glaucoma (n = 20) and healthy control (n = 13) groups across three conditions; between group effect p = 0.02.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study Investigators (1994). Advanced glaucoma intervention study: 2. Visual field test scoring and reliability. Ophthalmology 101 1445–1455. 10.1016/S0161-6420(94)31171-7 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Agarwal H. C., Gulati V., Sihota R. (2000). Visual field assessment in glaucoma: comparative evaluation of manual kinetic Goldmann perimetry and automated static perimetry. Indian J. Ophthalmol. 48 301–306. - PubMed
    1. Arbuthnott K., Frank J. (2000). Trail making test, part B as a measure of executive control: validation using a set-switching paradigm. J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsychol. 22 518–528. 10.1076/1380-3395(200008)22:4;1-0;FT518 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ball K., Owsley C., Sloane M. E., Roenker D. L., Bruni J. R. (1993). Visual attention problems as a predictor of vehicle crashes in older drivers. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 34 3110–3123. - PubMed
    1. Ball K. K., Roenker D. L., Bruni J. R. (1990). Developmental changes in attention and visual search throughout adulthood. Adv. Psychol. 69 489–508. 10.1016/S0166-4115(08)60472-0 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources