Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T01:54:43.577Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A novel computer test to assess driving-relevant cognitive functions – a pilot study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2013

Rahel Bieri ,
Michael Jäger ,
Nicole Gruber ,
Tobias Nef ,
René M. Müri  and
Urs P. Mosimann
Rahel Bieri
Affiliation:
Gerontechnology and Rehabilitation Group, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
Michael Jäger
Affiliation:
Gerontechnology and Rehabilitation Group, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
Nicole Gruber
Affiliation:
Gerontechnology and Rehabilitation Group, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
Tobias Nef
Affiliation:
Gerontechnology and Rehabilitation Group, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland ARTORG Center for Biomedical Engineering Research, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
René M. Müri
Affiliation:
Gerontechnology and Rehabilitation Group, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland Perception and Eye Movement Laboratory, Departments of Neurology and Clinical Research, University Hospital Inselspital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
Urs P. Mosimann*
Affiliation:
Gerontechnology and Rehabilitation Group, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland Department of Old Age Psychiatry, University Hospital of Psychiatry, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Prof Urs P. Mosimann, MD, PhD, Gerontechnology and Rehabilitation Group, University of Bern, Murtenstrasse 21, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland. Phone: +41-31-632-88-17; Fax: +41-31-632-89-44. Email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

The assessment of driving-relevant cognitive functions in older drivers is a difficult challenge as there is no clear-cut dividing line between normal cognition and impaired cognition and not all cognitive functions are equally important for driving.

Methods:

To support decision makers, the Bern Cognitive Screening Test (BCST) for older drivers was designed. It is a computer-assisted test battery assessing visuo-spatial attention, executive functions, eye–hand coordination, distance judgment, and speed regulation. Here we compare the performance in BCST with the performance in paper and pencil cognitive screening tests and the performance in the driving simulator testing of 41 safe drivers (without crash history) and 14 unsafe drivers (with crash history).

Results:

Safe drivers performed better than unsafe drivers in BCST (Mann–Whitney U test: U = 125.5; p = 0.001) and in the driving simulator (Student's t-test: t(44) = –2.64, p = 0.006). No clear group differences were found in paper and pencil screening tests (p > 0.05; ns). BCST was best at identifying older unsafe drivers (sensitivity 86%; specificity 61%) and was also better tolerated than the driving simulator test with fewer dropouts.

Conclusions:

BCST is more accurate than paper and pencil screening tests, and better tolerated than driving simulator testing when assessing driving-relevant cognition in older drivers.

Keywords

agecognitiondrivingcomputer-based testsdriving simulatorpaper and pencil testsscreeningfitness-to-drive
Type
Research Article
Information
International Psychogeriatrics , Volume 26 , Issue 2 , February 2014 , pp. 229 - 238
Copyright
Copyright © International Psychogeriatric Association 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aksan, N., Anderson, S. W., Dawson, J. D., Johnson, A. M., Uc, E. Y. and Rizzo, M. (2012). Cognitive functioning predicts driver safety on road tests 1 and 2 years later. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 60, 99–105.Google Scholar
American Psychological Association. (1986). Guidelines for Computer-Based Tests and Interpretations. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Ball, K. (1997). Attentional problems and older drivers. Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders, 11, 42–47.Google Scholar
Ball, K., Owsley, C., Sloane, M. E., Roenker, D. L. and Bruni, J. R. (1993). Visual attention problems as a predictor of vehicle crashes in older drivers. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 34, 3110–3123.Google Scholar
Bélanger, A., Gagnon, S. and Yamin, S. (2010). Capturing the serial nature of older drivers’ responses towards challenging events: a simulator study. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42, 809–817.Google Scholar
Bischoff, H. A.et al. (2003). Identifying a cut-off point for normal mobility: a comparison of the timed “up and go” test in community-dwelling and institutionalized elderly women. Age and Ageing, 32, 315–320.Google Scholar
Cantin, V., Lavallière, M., Simoneau, M. and Teasdale, N. (2009). Mental workload when driving in a simulator: effects of age and driving complexity. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 41, 763–771.Google Scholar
Classen, S., Bewernitz, M. and Shechtman, O. (2011). Driving simulator sickness: an evidence-based review of the literature. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 65, 179–188.Google Scholar
Crocker, L. and Algina, J. (2008). Introduction to Classical and Modern Test Theory. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Daigneault, G., Joly, P. and Frigon, J.-Y. (2002). Executive functions in the evaluation of accident risk of older drivers. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 24, 221–238.Google Scholar
De Raedt, R. and Ponjaert-Kristoffersen, I. (2001). Short Cognitive/Neuropsychological Test Battery for first-tier fitness-to-drive assessment of older adults. Clinical Neuropsychologist, 15, 329–336.Google Scholar
Dobbs, A. R., Heller, R. B. and Schopflocher, D. (1998). A comparative approach to identify unsafe older drivers. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 30, 363–370.Google Scholar
Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA). (2012). At a Glance Guide to the Current Medical Guidelines. Swansea, UK: DVLA.Google Scholar
Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E. and Mchugh, P. R. (1975). Mini Mental State: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–198.Google Scholar
Hakamies-Blomqvist, L. (2006). Are there safe and unsafe drivers? Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 9, 347–352.Google Scholar
Hakamies-Blomqvist, L. and Siren, A. (2003). Deconstructing a gender difference: driving cessation and personal driving history of older women. Journal of Safety Research, 34, 383–388.Google Scholar
Jäger, M., Bieri, R., Mosimann, U., Müri, R. and Nef, T. (2013). Bern Cognitive Screening Test Software. Available at: http://www.artorg.unibe.ch/content/research_units/gerontech_and_rehab/download/index_eng.html; last accessed 1 October 2013.Google Scholar
Jäncke, L., Brunner, B. and Esslen, M. (2008). Brain activation during fast driving in a driving simulator: the role of the lateral prefrontal cortex. NeuroReport, 19, 1127–1130.Google Scholar
Janke, M. K. and Eberhard, J. W. (1998). Assessing medically impaired older drivers in a licensing agency setting. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 30, 347–361.Google Scholar
Kennedy, R. S., Lane, N. E., Berbaum, K. S. and Lilienthal, M. G. (1993). Simulator sickness questionnaire: an enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3, 203–220.Google Scholar
Lee, H. C., Lee, A. H., Cameron, D. and Li-Tsang, C. (2003). Using a driving simulator to identify older drivers at inflated risk of motor vehicle crashes. Journal of Safety Research, 34, 453–459.Google Scholar
Mäntyjärvi, M. and Laitinen, T. (2001). Normal values for the Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity test. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 27, 261–266.Google Scholar
Marshall, S. C. (2008). The role of reduced fitness to drive due to medical impairments in explaining crashes involving older drivers. Traffic Injury Prevention, 9, 291–298.Google Scholar
Mathias, J. L. and Lucas, L. K. (2009). Cognitive predictors of unsafe driving in older drivers: a meta-analysis. International Psychogeriatrics, 21, 637–653.Google Scholar
Mead, A. and Drasgow, F. (1993). Equivalence of computerized and paper-and-pencil cognitive ability tests: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 449–458.Google Scholar
Mosimann, U. P.et al. (2012). Consensus recommendations for the assessment of fitness to drive in cognitively impaired patients. Praxis, 101, 451–64.Google Scholar
Murphy, J., Berwickd, M., Weinstein, M. C., Borus, J. F., Budman, S. H. and Klerman, G. L. (1987). Performance of screening and diagnostic tests: application of receiver operating characteristic analysis. Archives of General Psychiatry, 44, 550–555.Google Scholar
Nasreddine, Z. S.et al. (2005). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53, 695–699.Google Scholar
O'Neill, D., Neubauer, K., Boyle, M., Gerrard, J., Surmon, D. and Wilcock, G. K. (1992). Dementia and driving. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 85, 199–202.Google Scholar
Park, S. W.et al. (2011). Association between unsafe driving performance and cognitive-perceptual dysfunction in older drivers. Journal of Injury, Function and Rehabilitation, 3, 198–203.Google Scholar
Reed, M. P. and Green, P. A. (1999). Comparison of driving performance on-road and in a low-cost simulator using a concurrent telephone dialling task. Ergonomics, 42, 1015–1037.Google Scholar
Reger, M. A., Welsh, R. K., Watson, G., Cholerton, B., Baker, L. D. and Craft, S. (2004). The relationship between neuropsychological functioning and driving ability in dementia: a meta-analysis. Neuropsychology, 18, 85–93.Google Scholar
Reimer, B., D'Ambrosio, L. A., Coughlin, J. F., Kafrissen, M. E. and Biedermann, J. (2006). Using self-reported data to assess validity of driving simulation data. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 38, 314–324.Google Scholar
Reitan, R. M. (1992). Trail Making Test. Tucson, AZ: Reitan Neuropsychology Laboratory.Google Scholar
Ricci, R., Cedrone, C. and Cerulli, L. (1998). Standardized measurement of visual acuity. Ophthalmic Epidemiology, 5, 41–53.Google Scholar
Shulman, K. I. (2000). Clock-drawing: is it the ideal cognitive screening test? International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 15, 548–561.Google Scholar
Stelmach, G. E. and Nahom, A. (1992). Cognitive-motor abilities of the elderly driver. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 34, 53–65.Google Scholar
Wagner, J. T., Müri, R. M., Nef, T. and Mosimann, U. P. (2011). Cognition and driving in older persons. Swiss Medical Weekly, 140, w13136.Google Scholar
Wåhlberg, A. E. (2003). Some methodological deficiencies in studies on traffic accident predictors. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 35, 473–486.Google Scholar
Withaar, F. K., Brouwer, W. H. and Van Zomeren, A. H. (2000). Fitness to drive in older drivers with cognitive impairment. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 6, 480–490.Google Scholar