Risk of pedestrian collision for persons with peripheral field loss: A computational analysis.
| Autor: | Kurukuti NM, Manda S; Schepens Eye Research Institute of Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts., Peli E |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Zdroj: | Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry [Optom Vis Sci] 2024 Aug 01; Vol. 101 (8), pp. 514-522. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Aug 20. |
| DOI: | 10.1097/OPX.0000000000002175 |
| Abstrakt: | Significance: People with peripheral field loss report colliding with other pedestrians on their blind side(s). We show that, in dyadic collision scenarios between persons, one with field loss, such as homonymous hemianopia, and the other normally sighted pedestrian, collisions occur only if the persons with homonymous hemianopia are overtaking the pedestrians, and the collision risk is concentrated at farther bearing angles than previously suggested. Purpose: Prior work computed the risk of collision while simulating both pedestrians as points and did not consider the ability of the other pedestrian's normal vision to avoid the collision. We extended the model to better characterize the open space collision risk posed for persons with homonymous hemianopia by normally sighted pedestrians where both have volume. Methods: We computed the risk of collision with approaching pedestrians using a model that simulates approaching pedestrians as volumetric entities without vision, volumetric entities with vision, and as points for comparison with the prior work. Collision risk of approaching pedestrians is characterized for all three conditions through spatial collision risk maps and collision risk densities as a function of bearing and radial distances. Results: The collision risk for volumetric pedestrians is slightly different from that of point pedestrians. For volumetric pedestrians simulated with normal vision, the risk of collision was reduced substantially, as the other pedestrians could detect and avoid most impending collisions. The remaining collision risk is from pedestrians approaching at higher bearing angles (>50°) and from shorter radial distances (<2 m). Thus, collisions occurred when the pedestrians started in front of the person with homonymous hemianopia that was overtaking the pedestrian. Conclusions: The probability of collisions between pedestrians and the person with peripheral field loss is low and occurs only when the person with peripheral field loss is walking from behind the pedestrian at faster speed, thereby overtaking them. Such collisions occur with pedestrians at higher bearing angles, which should be monitored by assistive aids to avoid collisions. The same collision risk applies not only in homonymous hemianopia but also in other peripheral field loss such as monocular vision loss or concentric field loss, as common in retinitis pigmentosa and glaucoma. Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Disclosure: EP has patents for peripheral prisms assigned to Schepens Eye Research Institute and licensed to Chadwick Optical. The other authors have no financial conflict of interest. (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Optometry.) |
| Databáze: | MEDLINE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|