Driving Errors That Predict On-Road Outcomes in Adults With Multiple Sclerosis

Abstract

Driving errors that predict on-road outcomes for persons with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) are not well studied. The objective of this study was to determine whether adjustment-to-stimuli and gap acceptance errors significantly predict passing/failing a standardized on-road assessment of PwMS. Thirty-seven participants completed visual ability and visual attention assessments, and participated in an on-road assessment, where seven types of driving errors and pass/fail outcomes were determined. Adjustment-to-stimuli (No.) and gap acceptance errors (commit/did not commit) significantly predicted passing/failing the on-road assessment, with an area under the curve of 91.6% ( p < .0001). With no gap acceptance errors committed, five adjustment-to-stimuli errors optimally determined pass/fail outcomes in PwMS. Furthermore, with no adjustment to stimuli errors committed, committing any gap acceptance errors also optimally determined pass/fail outcomes in PwMS. Further research may focus on visual, cognitive, and/or motor impairments underlying adjustment-to-stimuli and gap acceptance errors for eventual development of rehabilitation strategies for PwMS.

Clinical predictors of driving simulator performance in drivers with multiple sclerosis

“…In the literature, twelve studies document findings of clinical and on-road assessments for drivers with MS Krasniuk et al, 2017;. These study findings are summarized in Appendix A (p. 153-157).…”

Independent outdoor mobility of persons with multiple sclerosis – A systematic review

“…Other characteristics of pwMS have also been related to the fitness to drive. These studies revealed that males with MS more often pass a driving test than females (Lincoln and Radford, 2008) and that lower education was associated with a greater chance of failing a driving test or failing such a test with more violations (Krasniuk et al, 2017;Devos et al, 2017). Furthermore, in one study it was observed that education was positively associated with driving related attention (Shawaryn et al, 2002).…”

“…Six studies assessing fitness to drive of pwMS by means of an onroad driving test showed pass rates of 78%-84% (Classen et al, 2018;Akinwuntan et al, 2014;Krasniuk et al, 2017;Morrow et al, 2018;Akinwuntan et al, 2018). However, one study (Ranchet et al, 2015) found a pass rate of 94%, while another study similar in design found a lower pass rate of 62% (Lincoln and Radford, 2008).…”

“…The relationship between disease course and severity of MS was assessed in ten studies (Chipchase et al, 2003;Schultheis et al, 2009;Akinwuntan et al, 2014;Krasniuk et al, 2017;Morrow et al, 2018;Akinwuntan et al, 20122013;Classen et al, 2017;Shawaryn et al, 2002). Firstly, pwMS with a higher EDSS score more often failed the driving test than pwMS with a lower EDSS score and applied more compensatory driving behaviours (Chipchase et al, 2003;Schultheis et al, 2009;Akinwuntan et al, 2014;.…”

“…Firstly, pwMS with a higher EDSS score more often failed the driving test than pwMS with a lower EDSS score and applied more compensatory driving behaviours (Chipchase et al, 2003;Schultheis et al, 2009;Akinwuntan et al, 2014;. Two studies (Krasniuk et al, 2017;Classen et al, 2017) found that type of MS rather than EDSS score could differentiate between those pwMS who failed and those who passed a driving test. These studies showed that individuals with SPMS failed more often than individuals with RRMS or PPMS.…”