Standardized on-road tests assessing fitness-to-drive in people with cognitive impairments: A systematic review

Abstract

The on-road assessment is the gold standard because of its ecological validity. Yet existing instruments are heterogeneous and little is known about their psychometric properties. This study identified existing on-road assessment instruments and extracted data on psychometric properties and usability in clinical settings. Method A systematic review identified studies evaluating standardized on-road evaluation instruments adapted for people with cognitive impairment. Published articles were searched on PubMed, CINHAL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect. Study quality and the level of evidence were assessed using the COSMIN checklist. The collected data were synthetized using a narrative approach. Usability was subjectively assessed for each instrument by extracting information on acceptability, access, cost, and training. Results The review identified 18 published studies between 1994 and 2016 that investigated 12 different on-road evaluation instruments: the Performance-Based Driving Evaluation, the Washington University Road Test, the New Haven, the Test Ride for Practical Fitness to Drive, the Rhode Island Road Test, the Sum of Manoeuvres Score, the Performance Analysis of Driving Ability, the Composite Driving Assessment Scale, the Nottingham Neurological Driving Assessment, the Driving Observation Schedule, the Record of Driving Errors, and the Western University's On-road Assessment. Participants were mainly male (64%), between 48 and 80 years old, and had a broad variety of cognitive disorders. Most instruments showed reasonable psychometric values for internal consistency, criterion validity, and reliability. However, the level of evidence was poor to support any of the instruments given the low number of studies for each.

Self-awareness predicts fitness to drive among adults referred to occupational therapy evaluation

“…On-road testing is considered the “golden standard” in determining driving fitness. Yet, on-road evaluation reliability and validity are at times questionable, due to methodological and environmental influences ( 45 ). Finally, future studies should include more than a single on-road experience to increase the sensitivity to detecting changes in estimation and to obtain a broader understanding of driving self-awareness.…”

Evaluating traditional Chinese medicine diagnostic instruments for functional dyspepsia: A systematic review on measurement properties

“…That said, systematic reviews on measurement properties of instruments other than patient-reported outcome have been conducted using the COSMIN guidelines. 59 , 60 , 61 Further amendments on the guidelines should be made for appraising TCM diagnostic instruments.…”

Aging and Driving: A Comparison of Driving Performance Between Older and Younger Drivers in an On-Road Driving Test

“…Based on the presented considerations, and to enhance the ecological validity of findings, the specific aim of this study was to compare real on-road driving performances in healthy and experienced older vs. younger drivers using an assessment form based on current driving-license examination guidelines in Norway and items from other tests designed for testing driving performance. Use of on-road tests and expert examiners to assess driving skills and driving performance are referred to as a "gold standard" assessment (Bellagamba et al, 2020). An on-road test conducted in real road and traffic environment are likely to give a more nuanced impression of driving skills and performance compared to only use of driving simulators, VR-glasses, or similar.…”