Changes in driving performance after first and second eye cataract surgery: A driving simulator study

A Systematic Review of the Effects of Second-Eye Cataract Surgery on Motor Function

“…The characteristics of these studies are shown in Table 1 and the quality assessment (assessed using the MMAT (Hong et al, 2019)) is shown in Table 2. From the final selection of 13 papers: 6 collected objective measures of motor performance, including in-vehicle trip monitoring (Agramunt et al, 2018); obstacle avoidance and mobility orientation (Elliott et al, 1997(Elliott et al, , 2000; timed 4 m walk, stair ascent/descent, get-up-and-go test (Lee et al, 2013); the extraction of injurious fall data from medical records (Meuleners et al, 2014); and simulated driving performance (Meuleners et al, 2021). From these 6 papers: 4 employed a within-subjects design (Agramunt et al, 2018;Lee et al, 2013;Meuleners et al, 2014Meuleners et al, , 2021 and two used a between-subjects design (Elliott et al, 1997(Elliott et al, , 2000.…”

“…Of these 41 records, 11 were deemed to assess the separate impact of SES on motor function (see Figure 1 ) ( Agramunt et al, 2018 ; Akman et al, 2019 ; Castells et al, 1999 ; Elliott et al, 2000 ; Feng et al, 2018 ; Foss et al, 2006 ; Gia To et al, 2014 ; Lee et al, 2013 ; Lundstrom et al, 2006 ; Meuleners et al, 2014 , 2019 ). Two papers were also included that were found outside of the search ( Elliott et al, 1997 ; Meuleners et al, 2021 ), giving a total of 13 papers to be included in the synthesis. The characteristics of these studies are shown in Table 1 and the quality assessment (assessed using the MMAT ( Hong et al, 2019 )) is shown in Table 2 .…”

“…From the final selection of 13 papers: 6 collected objective measures of motor performance, including in-vehicle trip monitoring ( Agramunt et al, 2018 ); obstacle avoidance and mobility orientation ( Elliott et al, 1997 , 2000 ); timed 4 m walk, stair ascent/descent, get-up-and-go test ( Lee et al, 2013 ); the extraction of injurious fall data from medical records ( Meuleners et al, 2014 ); and simulated driving performance ( Meuleners et al, 2021 ). From these 6 papers: 4 employed a within-subjects design ( Agramunt et al, 2018 ; Lee et al, 2013 ; Meuleners et al, 2014 , 2021 ) and two used a between-subjects design ( Elliott et al, 1997 , 2000 ). Of the 13 papers, 11 collected subjective measures of motor function including the VF-14 QoL questionnaire ( Castells et al, 1999 ; Foss et al, 2006 ; Akman et al, 2019 ); falls diary ( Foss et al, 2006 ; Gia To et al, 2014 ; Feng et al, 2018 ); Active Australia Survey ( Feng et al, 2018 ; Meuleners et al, 2019 ); Barthel Index ( Foss et al, 2006 ); Activities of Daily Vision Scale (ADVS) ( Elliott et al, 1997 , 2000 ; Lee et al, 2013 ); and Catquest ( Lundstrom et al, 2006 ).…”

“…The time lag between the publication of these two reports has seen particularly strong growth in the assessment of the effect of SES on driving performance. To this end, we now have a much better understanding of the benefits of SES in reducing crashes/near crashes and speeding ( Meuleners et al, 2021 ), although, there is still a need for further research in this area, whereby driving simulation seems to be a particularly powerful tool to measure changes to driving performance in a controlled, repeatable and safe manner following SES, as suggested in a 2016 review of cataract and driving performance ( Agramunt et al, 2016 ).…”

“…For example, research into the effect of SES on mobility is inconsistent, whereby, there is evidence that SES reduce the time taken and the number of obstacles hit while navigating a course (Elliott et al, 2000), whereas, other studies have not found this effect (Elliott et al, 1997). A similar pattern emerges in the driving literature whereby some studies predict a positive effect of SES on driving behaviours (Meuleners et al, 2021) and others find no significant effect (Lundstrom et al, 2006).…”