Abstract:Vision-impaired individuals often use a long white cane to assist them with gathering information about their surroundings. However, these aids are generally not used to detect obstacles above knee height. The purpose of this study is to determine whether a low-cost, custom-built electronic device clipped onto a traditional cane can provide adequate vibratory warning to the user of obstacles above knee height. Sixteen normally sighted blindfolded individuals participated in two mobility courses which they navi… Show more
“…Therefore, the results for walking speed, which also agree with observations made by O'Brien et al [42], seem to confirm hypothesis 1, namely that blindfolding non-visually impaired participants is an inaccurate substitute for blind participants in white cane experiments. Results obtained with non-visually impaired users will not necessarily generalize to visually impaired users.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Based on these results, which also agree with observations by O'Brien et al [42], we can only partially accept hypothesis 2, namely that electronic canes with additional obstacle cues lead to improved performance over traditional passive white canes, as the only observed benefit were the ability to detect hanging obstacles which cannot be detected by the white canes. In terms of ground obstacles, hypothesis 2 is rejected.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Wang and Kuchenbecker [40] evaluated their HALO system on low hanging obstacles with 12 blindfolded participants, while Pyun et al [41] employed 5 blindfolded participants. O'Brien et al [42] evaluated a low-cost device that could be attached to an existing white cane with 16 blindfolded participants. Of these, 10 participants successfully detected more obstacles with the electric cane than the white cane, while 12 participants yielded slower walking speeds with the electronic cane.…”
Visually impaired individuals often rely on assistive technologies such as white canes for independent navigation. Many electronic enhancements to the traditional white cane have been proposed. However, only a few of these proof-of-concept technologies have been tested with authentic users, as most studies rely on blindfolded non-visually impaired participants or no testing with participants at all. Experiments involving blind users are usually not contrasted with the traditional white cane. This study set out to compare an ultrasound-based electronic cane with a traditional white cane. Moreover, we also compared the performance of a group of visually impaired participants (N = 10) with a group of blindfolded participants without visual impairments (N = 31). The results show that walking speed with the electronic cane is significantly slower compared to the traditional white cane. Moreover, the results show that the performance of the participants without visual impairments is significantly slower than for the visually impaired participants. No significant differences in obstacle detection rates were observed across participant groups and device types for obstacles on the ground, while 79% of the hanging obstacles were detected by the electronic cane. The results of this study thus suggest that electronic canes present only one advantage over the traditional cane, namely in its ability to detect hanging obstacles, at least without prolonged practice. Next, blindfolded participants are insufficient substitutes for blind participants who are expert cane users. The implication of this study is that research into digital white cane enhancements should include blind participants. These participants should be followed over time in longitudinal experiments to document if practice will lead to improvements that surpass the performance achieved with traditional canes.
“…Therefore, the results for walking speed, which also agree with observations made by O'Brien et al [42], seem to confirm hypothesis 1, namely that blindfolding non-visually impaired participants is an inaccurate substitute for blind participants in white cane experiments. Results obtained with non-visually impaired users will not necessarily generalize to visually impaired users.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Based on these results, which also agree with observations by O'Brien et al [42], we can only partially accept hypothesis 2, namely that electronic canes with additional obstacle cues lead to improved performance over traditional passive white canes, as the only observed benefit were the ability to detect hanging obstacles which cannot be detected by the white canes. In terms of ground obstacles, hypothesis 2 is rejected.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Wang and Kuchenbecker [40] evaluated their HALO system on low hanging obstacles with 12 blindfolded participants, while Pyun et al [41] employed 5 blindfolded participants. O'Brien et al [42] evaluated a low-cost device that could be attached to an existing white cane with 16 blindfolded participants. Of these, 10 participants successfully detected more obstacles with the electric cane than the white cane, while 12 participants yielded slower walking speeds with the electronic cane.…”
Visually impaired individuals often rely on assistive technologies such as white canes for independent navigation. Many electronic enhancements to the traditional white cane have been proposed. However, only a few of these proof-of-concept technologies have been tested with authentic users, as most studies rely on blindfolded non-visually impaired participants or no testing with participants at all. Experiments involving blind users are usually not contrasted with the traditional white cane. This study set out to compare an ultrasound-based electronic cane with a traditional white cane. Moreover, we also compared the performance of a group of visually impaired participants (N = 10) with a group of blindfolded participants without visual impairments (N = 31). The results show that walking speed with the electronic cane is significantly slower compared to the traditional white cane. Moreover, the results show that the performance of the participants without visual impairments is significantly slower than for the visually impaired participants. No significant differences in obstacle detection rates were observed across participant groups and device types for obstacles on the ground, while 79% of the hanging obstacles were detected by the electronic cane. The results of this study thus suggest that electronic canes present only one advantage over the traditional cane, namely in its ability to detect hanging obstacles, at least without prolonged practice. Next, blindfolded participants are insufficient substitutes for blind participants who are expert cane users. The implication of this study is that research into digital white cane enhancements should include blind participants. These participants should be followed over time in longitudinal experiments to document if practice will lead to improvements that surpass the performance achieved with traditional canes.
“…Most of the tested devices have been designed to be used as a secondary device, complementing a traditional long cane as an attachment to the long cane (Gallo et al, 2010; S. Kim & Cho, 2013; O’Brien, Mohtar, Diment, & Reynolds, 2014; Pyun, Kim, Wespe, Schneller, & Gassert, 2013; Tahat, 2009; Wang & Kuchenbecher, 2012). The majority of these studies reported a moderate improvement in object detection rate, largely as a result of detecting above-waist-level overhanging obstacles, which the traditional long cane is inherently unable to detect.…”
A repeated-measures design with block randomization was used for the study, in which 15 adults with visual impairments attempted to detect the drop-offs and obstacles with the canes of different lengths, swinging the cane in different widths (narrow vs wide). Participants detected the drop-offs significantly more reliably with the standard-length cane (79.5% ± 6.5% of the time) than with the extended-length cane (67.6% ± 9.1%), p <.001. The drop-off detection threshold of the standard-length cane (4.1 ± 1.1 cm) was also significantly smaller than that of the extended-length cane (6.5±1.8cm), p <.001. In addition, participants detected drop-offs at a significantly higher percentage when they swung the cane approximately 3 cm beyond the widest part of the body (78.6% ± 7.6%) than when they swung it substantially wider (30 cm; 68.5% ± 8.3%), p <.001. In contrast, neither cane length (p =.074) nor cane swing arc width (p =.185) had a significant effect on obstacle detection performance. The findings of the study may help orientation and mobility specialists recommend appropriate cane length and cane swing arc width to visually impaired cane users.
“…Esta situación generará una carga social, económica y cultural de alcance universal, con énfasis en los países de ingresos medianos y bajos [1]. Aunque existen ayudas para mejorar la visión residual en personas con discapacidad visual leve a moderada, estas no sirven para personas con discapacidad visual severa a profunda (DVS, DVP) o con ceguera, las cuales necesitan desarrollar habilidades que sustituyan la visión [4]. Para ellas el logro de la independencia en actividades básicas e instrumentales de la vida diaria es más difícil, teniendo en cuenta que puede coexistir otro tipo de discapacidades que limitan aún más este proceso.…”
Este documento presenta una revisión literaria, de los dispositivos de ayuda en la movilidad para personas con discapacidad visual, con el objetivo de obtener una visión clara, sobre el progreso de la tecnología y técnicas empleadas para asistir a esta población. De esta forma, se pretende obtener pautas básicas para analizar los equipos más relevantes, para ayudar a las personas con visión reducida y destacar las mejoras que se podrían implementar. Los dispositivos más comunes, corresponden a la integración de diferentes sensores y componentes electrónicos en bastones, para aumentar su capacidad de detección de obstáculos. Además, se han desarrollado dispositivos con cámaras, que incluyen algoritmos de visión por computador y técnicas de Inteligencia Artificial, para mejorar los resultados y eficiencia de los equipos. Finalmente, se presentan las características fundamentales para los sistemas de asistencia, encontrando que aún no se cuenta con dispositivos que satisfagan las necesidades de los usuarios.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.