Driving with the BiOptic Telescope in California
description
Transcript of Driving with the BiOptic Telescope in California
David F. Hennessy PhDCalifornia Department of Motor Vehicles
Driving with the BiOptic Telescope in California
DMV Perspective
2004 International BiOptic Driving Conference
California DMVBackground Info
BTL Licensing Policies & Procedures
1983 BTL Study Reports
Assessing Driving Fitness with Three-Tier Assessment System
California Department of Motor
Vehicles
N = 9,000 Employees
N = 168 Field offices
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/
Research and Development Branch
N = 11 Research Staff
Develop and Evaluate Traffic Safety Programs
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/about/profile/rd/rdtoc.htm
BTL Licensing Policies and Procedures
Report of Vision Examination
DiagnosisPrognosis
Vision-Related Driving Advice
Visual Acuity with the Carrier Lens must be better than 20/200
Field of Vision must extend out to at least 75 degreesto the far right & far left
Must have completed training in using BTL
Must pass DMV road test that includes freeway driving
Or
Accept restriction from freeway driving
May not renew license by mail
Automatically restricted from nighttime driving - May be challenged
Challenging restriction from nighttime driving:
Optometrist or ophthalmologistmust not have advised against night driving
Must pass nighttime road test
BTL Controversy-California DMV Study
Janke, M. & Kazarian, G. 1983DMV Report #86
Janke, M. 1983Journal of Safety ResearchVolume 14, pp. 159-165
Mean BTL Accident Rate Relative to General Driving Population – Janke 1983
Included:
229 BTL Drivers
Deceased
Suspended
Revoked
Not Renewed
185 BTL Drivers
Validly Licensed Only
All Accidents Raw Means 1.9* 1.6* Adjusted Means 1.5* 1.2 Fatal or Injury Accidents
Raw Means 2.9* 2.1 Adjusted Means 2.2* 1.7
When the Janke 1983 analysis was confined to only validly licensed drivers, the adjusted mean accident rates for BTL drivers are not significantly higher than the general driving population.
Two General Limitations of BTL Studies
Do not know whether BTL was actually worn or used when accident-involved
Amalgamation errors
Ophthalmologists’ Waiting Rooms
50% Designated DriversBest Corrected VA = 20/20
50% PatientsBest Corrected VA=20/80
Overall Mean VA =20/40
My conclusion?
The people sitting in ophthalmologists’ waiting rooms meet the California DMV 20/40 screening standard
Amalgamation Error
Treating BTL drivers as though they are a functionally unitary group is no less an amalgamation error
Congenital and Stable (ocular albinism )+Progressive (age-related macular degeneration)
= Amalgamation Error
Reduced Central Vision Only(age-related macular degeneration)+Both Reduced Central Vision and Peripheral Fields(retinitis pigmentosa)
= Amalgamation Error
Proficient in Spotting while keeping both eyes open+Minimally trained in the use of the BTL
= Amalgamation Error
The Overall Mean accident rates for BTL drivers are artifacts produced by amalgamating entirely different subgroups.
Conclusions based on the Overall Mean accident rates of BTL drivers are as misguided as concluding that people sitting in ophthalmologists’ waiting rooms meet the California DMV 20/40 screening standard.
The overarching goal of the three-tier system is to keep drivers driving safely for as long as possible.