A Pilot Study Comparing Performance of Blind Participants on 12 Tasks, With and Without the ARIA Device

Summary The environment in which we live, play and travel is primarily built by and for people with sight. Navigating the sighted world with blindness can be exhausting, as it involves disorientation, social isolation, increased risk, frustration and inefficiency. Accessing timely information about the environment is necessary to navigate an efficient path of travel and reduce the effort involved in living with blindness. Numerous assistive technologies have been developed to improve access to information, and quality of life for people with blindness, however persistent technology limitations include affordability, unreliable internet connection, lag and limited battery life. Existing technologies can offer scene description or text-to-voice quite effectively when the user is standing still, but not quickly enough to gain benefit when on the move. Timely information is crucial at road crossings, where poor decisions can result in injury. Information lag or deficit also compounds travel fatigue due to time and energy wasted in searching, uncertainty and frustration. Blind users are often brought in to test new technologies or devices in controlled, clinical conditions, when it is too late to influence design. There is little evidence of testing these technologies in lived environments to understand the functional benefits for the blind population, partly because there is a dearth of available methods and measures to embrace the complexity of functional research. This study will test the safety, efficacy and usability of the ARIA Device in 12 varied research tasks undertaken by blind participants in clinical, social and outdoor lived environments, comparing ARIA performance with each participant's ordinary (non-ARIA) methods of undertaking the same tasks. The study uses an embedded mixed methods design with a qualitative priority, generating rich, precise data about what matters to participants and what they can do in diverse situations.

A controlled, open label pilot study to assess the safety, efficacy, and usability of the ARIA Device with blind individuals who have no light perception or light perception only. Intervention Name: The ARIA Device Why: This study broadly asks: What is the ARIA difference, and how do we measure it? Aria Research is committed to codesign - developing assistive technology with and for people who are blind, so that the resulting device has genuine utility. This pilot study explores the ARIA difference by comparing the performance of blind adults on 12 different research tasks that were codesigned with blind adults to represent their everyday tasks and environments. Each participant serves as their own control, undertaking each task with and without the Aria Device. This embedded mixed methods study has a qualitative priority. Checking the relevance of tasks and measures with every participant is part of warranting the validity of measurement data and the transferability/generalisability of study findings. What: Materials for this study include the prototype ARIA Device being investigated, and the research resources that provide context for the investigation. ARIA stands for Augmented Reality in Audio. The ARIA Device consists of Augmented Reality glasses connected by cord to a dedicated mobile phone that has the ARIA app installed. The glasses include cameras, speakers and an inertial measurement unit. The phone app uses artificial intelligence to convert camera vision from the glasses into a soundscape that includes words and unique sounds identifying specific objects nearby, and an audio rendering of depth that estimates the user's distance from solid matter. This soundscape is delivered to the user via an amplifier that enables volume control and switch-off. The soundscape is designed to augment rather than replace natural hearing, increasing the user's perceptual access to details in the nearby environment. The ARIA Device is a secondary aid, designed to complement rather than replace a primary mobility aid (long cane, guide dog or human guide). The glasses are secured to the wearer's head with a lanyard and the other components are mounted onto a lightweight backpack, leaving the user's hands free to manage a long cane, guide dog harness, bus pass or shopping bag. The research protocol uses multiple private and public indoor settings in and around Aria HQ: a deskspace and boardroom for talking and training; a contrived office, motel room and waiting room simulate real world scenarios; a large multi-purpose room and research laboratory house several clinical search tasks; an office corridor and public foyer are lived environments that offer room to move fluently. Then the living lab beyond the front door, includes busy footpaths, streets, and businesses in the Sydney CBD. Research resources in these settings include objects the ARIA Device can recognise in the context of the varied tasks undertaken therein. Procedures: People who express Покажи пълното описание...

Inclusion Criteria: * Individuals over the age of 18 * Working English proficiency * No light perception, or light perception only (VROOM score \<10/50). * Ambulant, with sufficient stamina to stand/walk for at least 30 minutes between breaks during a 3-4 hour research session. * Independent long cane traveller. * Sufficient hearing for conversation, with no hearing aids and no worse than mild to moderate hearing loss. * Smartphone skills and familiarity with at least one app/device useful for wayfinding. * Able to attend 4 research sessions in person at the investigation site in Haymarket, Sydney. * Able to comply with all investigational requirements. Exclusion Criteria: * Under 18 years, or adults unable to give informed consent (e.g., under guardianship). * Vision greater than light perception only (VROOM \>10/50). * Physical limitations that compromise stamina needed to complete a four-hour research session. * Hearing aids; severe-profound hearing loss determined as insufficient hearing for unaided conversation * No smartphone skills or prior use of assistive technology. * Unwilling to be videoed during research tasks. * Unlikely to attend all follow-up study visits.