Sarah Krasniuk, Alexander M Crizzle, Ryan Toxopeus, Diane Mychael, Natasha Prince
{"title":"Clinical Tests Predicting On-Road Performance in Older Drivers with Cognitive Impairment.","authors":"Sarah Krasniuk, Alexander M Crizzle, Ryan Toxopeus, Diane Mychael, Natasha Prince","doi":"10.1177/00084174221117708","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background.</b> The Trail Making Test Part B (Trails B) and Useful Field of View® (UFOV) can predict on-road outcomes in drivers with cognitive impairment (CI); however, studies have not included drivers referred for comprehensive driving evaluations (CDEs), who typically have more severe CI. <b>Purpose.</b> We determined the predictive ability of Trails B and UFOV on pass/fail on-road outcomes in drivers with CI (Montreal Cognitive Assessment <26) referred for CDEs. <b>Method.</b> Retrospective data collection from two driving assessments centers (<i>N</i> = 100, mean age = 76.2 ± 8.8 years). <b>Findings.</b> The Trails B (area under the curve [AUC] = .70) and UFOV subtests 2 (AUC = .73) and 3 (AUC = .76) predicted pass/fail outcomes. A cut-point ≥467 ms on UFOV subtest 3 better-predicted pass/fail outcomes with 78.9% sensitivity and 73.5% specificity. In comparison, a cut-point ≥3.58 min on Trails B had lower sensitivity (73.7%) and specificity (61.8%). <b>Implications.</b> The UFOV subtest 3 may be more useful than the Trails B for predicting pass/fail outcomes in drivers with more severe CI referred for CDEs.</p>","PeriodicalId":49097,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy-Revue Canadienne D Ergotherapie","volume":"90 1","pages":"44-54"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9923206/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy-Revue Canadienne D Ergotherapie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00084174221117708","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background. The Trail Making Test Part B (Trails B) and Useful Field of View® (UFOV) can predict on-road outcomes in drivers with cognitive impairment (CI); however, studies have not included drivers referred for comprehensive driving evaluations (CDEs), who typically have more severe CI. Purpose. We determined the predictive ability of Trails B and UFOV on pass/fail on-road outcomes in drivers with CI (Montreal Cognitive Assessment <26) referred for CDEs. Method. Retrospective data collection from two driving assessments centers (N = 100, mean age = 76.2 ± 8.8 years). Findings. The Trails B (area under the curve [AUC] = .70) and UFOV subtests 2 (AUC = .73) and 3 (AUC = .76) predicted pass/fail outcomes. A cut-point ≥467 ms on UFOV subtest 3 better-predicted pass/fail outcomes with 78.9% sensitivity and 73.5% specificity. In comparison, a cut-point ≥3.58 min on Trails B had lower sensitivity (73.7%) and specificity (61.8%). Implications. The UFOV subtest 3 may be more useful than the Trails B for predicting pass/fail outcomes in drivers with more severe CI referred for CDEs.
背景。Trail Making Test Part B (Trails B)和Useful Field of View®(UFOV)可以预测认知障碍(CI)驾驶员的道路状况;然而,这些研究没有包括接受综合驾驶评估(CDEs)的司机,他们通常有更严重的CI。目的。我们用CI(蒙特利尔认知评估方法)确定了Trails B和UFOV对驾驶员通过/不通过道路结果的预测能力。回顾性资料收集自两个驾驶评估中心(N = 100,平均年龄= 76.2±8.8岁)。发现。轨迹B(曲线下面积[AUC] = 0.70)和UFOV子测试2 (AUC = 0.73)和3 (AUC = 0.76)预测通过/失败结果。UFOV子测试3的临界值≥467 ms可以更好地预测合格/不合格结果,灵敏度为78.9%,特异性为73.5%。相比之下,切口点≥3.58 min在Trails B上的敏感性(73.7%)和特异性(61.8%)较低。的影响。UFOV子测试3可能比Trails B在预测CDEs中有更严重CI的驾驶员的通过/失败结果方面更有用。
期刊介绍:
The Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy was first published in September 1933. Since that time, it has fostered advancement and growth in occupational therapy scholarship. The mission of the journal is to provide a forum for leading-edge occupational therapy scholarship that advances theory, practice, research, and policy. The vision is to be a high-quality scholarly journal that is at the forefront of the science of occupational therapy and a destination journal for the top scholars in the field, globally.