Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 10, 2026
11:12
Driving Simulation in the Clinic: Testing Visual Exploratory Behavior in Daily Life Activities in Patients with Visual Field Defects
Published on: September 18, 2012
Assessing visual fields for driving in patients with paracentral scotomata
C M Chisholm1, F G Rauscher, D C Crabb
1Department of Optometry, University of Bradford, Richmond Road, Bradford BD7 1DP, UK. c.m.chisholm@bradford.ac.uk
The British Journal of Ophthalmology
|October 27, 2007
Summary
The Integrated Visual Field (IVF) test shows good agreement with the Esterman visual field test (EVFT) for driving fitness. However, IVF may pass some individuals with neurological paracentral scotomata currently failing the EVFT.
Area of Science:
- Ophthalmology
- Neurology
- Driving Safety
Background:
- The binocular Esterman visual field test (EVFT) is standard for UK driving assessments.
- The Integrated Visual Field (IVF) test is a proposed alternative for glaucoma patients.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess agreement between EVFT and IVF for patients with binocular paracentral scotomata.
- To compare visual field test results with Useful Field of View (UFOV) performance for driving relevance.
Main Methods:
- 60 patients with binocular paracentral scotomata and normal visual acuity were prospectively studied.
- Participants completed EVFT, IVF, and UFOV tests, classified as 'pass' or 'fail'.
Main Results:
- High agreement (kappa = 0.84) was found between EVFT and IVF classifications.
- Four subjects with neurological paracentral scotomata showed classification discrepancies.
- No significant difference in UFOV scores was observed between 'pass' and 'fail' groups for visual field tests.
- Limited agreement was noted between visual field tests and UFOV (EVFT kappa = 0.22, IVF kappa = 0.32).
Conclusions:
- IVF and EVFT demonstrate good agreement for UK driving fitness classification.
- IVF may classify individuals with non-glaucomatous paracentral scotomata as fit to drive, unlike the EVFT.
- The UFOV's utility in assessing crash risk for individuals with visual field loss requires further investigation.
