Yi Ni Toh PhD, Jing Xu PhD, Patrick Baker BS, Alex R. Bowers PhD
{"title":"Reinforcement-Based Head Scan Training for Drivers With Homonymous Visual Field Loss: Improves Blind-Side Detection","authors":"Yi Ni Toh PhD, Jing Xu PhD, Patrick Baker BS, Alex R. Bowers PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.apmr.2026.04.038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To evaluate whether a reinforcement-based head scanning training program improves blind-side hazard detection in drivers with homonymous visual field loss.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Single-arm nonrandomized clinical trial with 1-month follow-up.</div></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><div>Research laboratory.</div></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><div>Inclusion criteria included ≥3 months post–onset hemianopia or quadrantanopia, no neglect or major cognitive decline, and current or former driving experience. Sixteen of 23 volunteers met criteria and completed the study (median age=52.5y; 56% left-sided field loss).</div></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><div>Participants completed three 1-hour sessions of a reinforcement-based head scanning training program in a driving simulator. An auditory reminder cue served as immediate, error-contingent feedback, sounding from a loudspeaker on the participant’s blind-side if they failed to make a large, early head scan to their blind-side before an intersection.</div></div><div><h3>Main Outcomes Measures</h3><div>The primary outcomes were rates of proactive blind-side scanning (the proportion of intersections with an early large head scan) and blind-side hazard detection (the proportion of hazards detected) assessed without reminder cues at pretraining, 1 week posttraining, and 1 month posttraining. All hypotheses were prespecified.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Proactive blind-side head scanning increased significantly from 17.5% (95% CI, 8.9%-26.0%) at pretraining to 83.6% (95% CI, 76.5%-90.7%) at 1 week posttraining and 72.6% (95% CI, 63.4%-81.9%) at 1 month posttraining. Likewise, blind-side hazard detection improved significantly from 55.6% (95% CI, 41.3%-69.9%) to 85.6% (95% CI, 76.3%-95.0%) at 1 week posttraining and 82.5% (95% CI, 70.1%-94.9%) at 1 month posttraining. Improvements were primarily because of fewer scanning-related errors.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Three sessions of reinforcement-based head scanning training significantly improved blind-side head scanning and hazard detection in drivers with homonymous visual field loss, with benefits lasting at least 1 month. These results support the promise of this rehabilitation approach for poststroke driving and warrant further evaluation in a randomized controlled trial.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":8313,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation","volume":"107 10","pages":"Pages 2713-2721"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003999326007094","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/5/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective
To evaluate whether a reinforcement-based head scanning training program improves blind-side hazard detection in drivers with homonymous visual field loss.
Design
Single-arm nonrandomized clinical trial with 1-month follow-up.
Setting
Research laboratory.
Participants
Inclusion criteria included ≥3 months post–onset hemianopia or quadrantanopia, no neglect or major cognitive decline, and current or former driving experience. Sixteen of 23 volunteers met criteria and completed the study (median age=52.5y; 56% left-sided field loss).
Interventions
Participants completed three 1-hour sessions of a reinforcement-based head scanning training program in a driving simulator. An auditory reminder cue served as immediate, error-contingent feedback, sounding from a loudspeaker on the participant’s blind-side if they failed to make a large, early head scan to their blind-side before an intersection.
Main Outcomes Measures
The primary outcomes were rates of proactive blind-side scanning (the proportion of intersections with an early large head scan) and blind-side hazard detection (the proportion of hazards detected) assessed without reminder cues at pretraining, 1 week posttraining, and 1 month posttraining. All hypotheses were prespecified.
Results
Proactive blind-side head scanning increased significantly from 17.5% (95% CI, 8.9%-26.0%) at pretraining to 83.6% (95% CI, 76.5%-90.7%) at 1 week posttraining and 72.6% (95% CI, 63.4%-81.9%) at 1 month posttraining. Likewise, blind-side hazard detection improved significantly from 55.6% (95% CI, 41.3%-69.9%) to 85.6% (95% CI, 76.3%-95.0%) at 1 week posttraining and 82.5% (95% CI, 70.1%-94.9%) at 1 month posttraining. Improvements were primarily because of fewer scanning-related errors.
Conclusions
Three sessions of reinforcement-based head scanning training significantly improved blind-side head scanning and hazard detection in drivers with homonymous visual field loss, with benefits lasting at least 1 month. These results support the promise of this rehabilitation approach for poststroke driving and warrant further evaluation in a randomized controlled trial.
期刊介绍:
The Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation publishes original, peer-reviewed research and clinical reports on important trends and developments in physical medicine and rehabilitation and related fields. This international journal brings researchers and clinicians authoritative information on the therapeutic utilization of physical, behavioral and pharmaceutical agents in providing comprehensive care for individuals with chronic illness and disabilities.
Archives began publication in 1920, publishes monthly, and is the official journal of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Its papers are cited more often than any other rehabilitation journal.