Agramunt Seraina, Meuleners Lynn, Chow Kyle Chi, Ng Jonathon Q, Morlet Nigel
Curtin-Monash Accident Research Centre (C-MARC), Curtin University, Perth, Australia; Eye & Vision Epidemiology Research (EVER) Group, Perth, Australia.
Curtin-Monash Accident Research Centre (C-MARC), Curtin University, Perth, Australia; Eye & Vision Epidemiology Research (EVER) Group, Perth, Australia.
Accid Anal Prev. 2017 Sep;106:492-497. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2016.10.021. Epub 2016 Oct 25.
Advances in technology have made it possible to examine real-world driving using naturalistic data obtained from in-vehicle monitoring devices. These devices overcome the weaknesses of self-report methods and can provide comprehensive insights into driving exposure, habits and practices of older drivers.
The aim of this study is to compare self-reported and objectively measured driving exposure, habits and practices using a travel diary and an in-vehicle driver monitoring device in older drivers with bilateral cataract.
A cross-sectional study was undertaken. Forty seven participants aged 58-89 years old (mean=74.1; S.D.=7.73) were recruited from three eye clinics over a one year period. Data collection consisted of a cognitive test, a researcher-administered questionnaire, a travel diary and an in-vehicle monitoring device. Participants' driving exposure and patterns were recorded for one week using in-vehicle monitoring devices. They also completed a travel diary each time they drove a motor vehicle as the driver. Paired t-tests were used to examine differences/agreement between the two instruments under different driving circumstances.
The data from the older drivers' travel diaries significantly underestimated the number of overall trips (p<0.001), weekend trips (p=0.002) and trips during peak hour (p=0.004). The travel diaries also significantly overestimated overall driving duration (p<0.001) and weekend driving duration (p=0.003), compared to the data obtained from the in-vehicle monitoring devices. No significant differences were found between instruments for kilometres travelled under any of the driving circumstances.
The results of this study found that relying solely on self-reported travel diaries to assess driving outcomes may not be accurate, particularly for estimates of the number of trips made and duration of trips. The clear advantages of using in-vehicle monitoring devices over travel diaries to monitor driving habits and exposure among an older population are evident.
技术进步使得利用从车载监测设备获取的自然主义数据来研究现实世界中的驾驶情况成为可能。这些设备克服了自我报告方法的弱点,能够全面洞察老年驾驶员的驾驶暴露情况、习惯和行为。
本研究的目的是使用旅行日记和车载驾驶员监测设备,比较双侧白内障老年驾驶员自我报告的和客观测量的驾驶暴露情况、习惯和行为。
进行了一项横断面研究。在一年时间内,从三家眼科诊所招募了47名年龄在58 - 89岁之间(平均年龄 = 74.1岁;标准差 = 7.73)的参与者。数据收集包括认知测试、研究人员发放的问卷、旅行日记和车载监测设备。使用车载监测设备记录参与者一周的驾驶暴露情况和模式。他们每次作为驾驶员驾驶机动车时也完成一份旅行日记。配对t检验用于检验两种工具在不同驾驶情况下的差异/一致性。
老年驾驶员旅行日记的数据显著低估了总行程次数(p < 0.001)、周末行程次数(p = 0.002)和高峰时段行程次数(p = 0.004)。与从车载监测设备获得的数据相比,旅行日记还显著高估了总驾驶时长(p < 0.001)和周末驾驶时长(p = 0.003)。在任何驾驶情况下,两种工具在行驶公里数方面均未发现显著差异。
本研究结果发现,仅依靠自我报告的旅行日记来评估驾驶结果可能不准确,尤其是在行程次数和行程时长的估计方面。在监测老年人群的驾驶习惯和暴露情况方面,使用车载监测设备相对于旅行日记的明显优势是显而易见的。