Can J Occup Ther. 2023 Mar;90(1):44-54. doi: 10.1177/00084174221117708. Epub 2022 Aug 10.
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. 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. Retrospective data collection from two driving assessments centers ( = 100, mean age = 76.2 ± 8.8 years). 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%). 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.
《连线测试 B 部分(Trails B)》和《有用视野测试》(UFOV)可预测认知障碍(CI)驾驶员的道路行驶结果;然而,这些研究并未纳入因全面驾驶评估(CDE)而转诊的驾驶员,他们通常有更严重的 CI。我们确定了 Trails B 和 UFOV 在认知障碍转诊至 CDE 的驾驶员的道路行驶结果(蒙特利尔认知评估 <26)中的预测能力。对两个驾驶评估中心的回顾性数据收集( = 100,平均年龄 = 76.2 ± 8.8 岁)。Trails B(曲线下面积 [AUC] = .70)和 UFOV 子测试 2(AUC = .73)和 3(AUC = .76)预测了通过/失败的结果。UFOV 子测试 3 的截点≥467 ms 更好地预测了通过/失败的结果,敏感性为 78.9%,特异性为 73.5%。相比之下,Trails B 的截点≥3.58 min 具有较低的敏感性(73.7%)和特异性(61.8%)。在认知障碍更严重转诊至 CDE 的驾驶员中,UFOV 子测试 3 可能比 Trails B 更有助于预测通过/失败的结果。