Bédard Michel, Maxwell Hillary, Gibbons Carrie, Dubois Sacha, Weaver Bruce, Middleton Randy
Center for Research on Safe Driving, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Canada.
Center for Applied Health Research, St. Joseph's Care Group, Thunder Bay, Canada.
Occup Ther Health Care. 2025 Jul;39(3):479-499. doi: 10.1080/07380577.2025.2488122. Epub 2025 Apr 5.
Comprehensive driving evaluations for older adults with cognitive impairment are time-consuming, expensive, and involve risk. To minimize these challenges, we evaluated a three-tiered driving evaluation process incorporating cognitive tests (Step 1), a driving simulator test (Step 2), and a road test (Step 3). Participants in this study were referred to a driving assessment center for concerns about cognitive fitness-to-drive. Each participant completed all three evaluation steps. Their fitness-to-drive was determined independently by an occupational therapist and an experienced driving evaluator with a driver instructor background. Our main objective was to examine the agreement between the occupational therapist's determination of fitness-to-drive after each step and the driving evaluator's determination of fitness-to-drive after the road test. As a secondary objective, the occupational therapist's confidence in their determinations was also examined. Results showed agreement for 38.8% of participants after Step 1, 46.5% after Step 2, and 92.3% after Step 3. The mean occupational therapist's confidence rating in their determination (scale of 0 to 100; higher is better) was 36.15 after Step 1, 49.54 after Step 2, and 90.54 after Step 3. All drivers deemed to have passed the evaluation had been identified as such after the driving simulator test. These results suggest that the best agreement between the occupational therapist and the driving evaluator was reached after the final step. However, the results also indicate that for some participants, a road test may not be required following a driving simulator test. Eliminating the road test in some instances may create efficiencies and reduce cost and risk while maintaining accurate determinations of fitness-to-drive.
对认知障碍老年人进行全面的驾驶评估既耗时、成本高又存在风险。为了尽量减少这些挑战,我们评估了一个三层驾驶评估流程,该流程包括认知测试(第一步)、驾驶模拟器测试(第二步)和道路测试(第三步)。本研究的参与者因对认知驾驶适宜性的担忧而被转介到驾驶评估中心。每位参与者都完成了所有三个评估步骤。他们的驾驶适宜性由一名职业治疗师和一名具有驾驶教练背景的经验丰富的驾驶评估员独立确定。我们的主要目标是检查职业治疗师在每个步骤后对驾驶适宜性的判定与驾驶评估员在道路测试后对驾驶适宜性的判定之间的一致性。作为次要目标,还检查了职业治疗师对其判定的信心。结果显示,第一步后38.8%的参与者判定结果一致,第二步后为46.5%,第三步后为92.3%。职业治疗师对其判定的平均信心评分(0至100分制;分数越高越好)在第一步后为36.15,第二步后为49.54,第三步后为90.54。所有被认为通过评估的驾驶员在驾驶模拟器测试后就已被确定。这些结果表明,职业治疗师和驾驶评估员之间在最后一步后达成了最佳一致性。然而,结果也表明,对于一些参与者,在驾驶模拟器测试后可能不需要进行道路测试。在某些情况下取消道路测试可能会提高效率、降低成本和风险,同时保持对驾驶适宜性的准确判定。