Cargando…

Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive

BACKGROUND: Fitness-to-drive guidelines recommend employing the Trail Making B Test (a.k.a. Trails B), but do not provide guidance regarding cut-off scores. There is ongoing debate regarding the optimal cut-off score on the Trails B test. The objective of this study was to address this controversy b...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Roy, Mononita, Molnar, Frank
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Canadian Geriatrics Society 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3753211/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23983828
http://dx.doi.org/10.5770/cgj.16.76
_version_ 1782281794618392576
author Roy, Mononita
Molnar, Frank
author_facet Roy, Mononita
Molnar, Frank
author_sort Roy, Mononita
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Fitness-to-drive guidelines recommend employing the Trail Making B Test (a.k.a. Trails B), but do not provide guidance regarding cut-off scores. There is ongoing debate regarding the optimal cut-off score on the Trails B test. The objective of this study was to address this controversy by systematically reviewing the evidence for specific Trails B cut-off scores (e.g., cut-offs in both time to completion and number of errors) with respect to fitness-to-drive. METHODS: Systematic review of all prospective cohort, retrospective cohort, case-control, correlation, and cross-sectional studies reporting the ability of the Trails B to predict driving safety that were published in English-language, peer-reviewed journals. RESULTS: Forty-seven articles were reviewed. None of the articles justified sample sizes via formal calculations. Cut-off scores reported based on research include: 90 seconds, 133 seconds, 147 seconds, 180 seconds, and < 3 errors. CONCLUSIONS: There is support for the previously published Trails B cut-offs of 3 minutes or 3 errors (the ‘3 or 3 rule’). Major methodological limitations of this body of research were uncovered including (1) lack of justification of sample size leaving studies open to Type II error (i.e., false negative findings), and (2) excessive focus on associations rather than clinically useful cut-off scores.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3753211
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Canadian Geriatrics Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37532112013-08-27 Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive Roy, Mononita Molnar, Frank Can Geriatr J Systemic Reviews/Meta-Analysis BACKGROUND: Fitness-to-drive guidelines recommend employing the Trail Making B Test (a.k.a. Trails B), but do not provide guidance regarding cut-off scores. There is ongoing debate regarding the optimal cut-off score on the Trails B test. The objective of this study was to address this controversy by systematically reviewing the evidence for specific Trails B cut-off scores (e.g., cut-offs in both time to completion and number of errors) with respect to fitness-to-drive. METHODS: Systematic review of all prospective cohort, retrospective cohort, case-control, correlation, and cross-sectional studies reporting the ability of the Trails B to predict driving safety that were published in English-language, peer-reviewed journals. RESULTS: Forty-seven articles were reviewed. None of the articles justified sample sizes via formal calculations. Cut-off scores reported based on research include: 90 seconds, 133 seconds, 147 seconds, 180 seconds, and < 3 errors. CONCLUSIONS: There is support for the previously published Trails B cut-offs of 3 minutes or 3 errors (the ‘3 or 3 rule’). Major methodological limitations of this body of research were uncovered including (1) lack of justification of sample size leaving studies open to Type II error (i.e., false negative findings), and (2) excessive focus on associations rather than clinically useful cut-off scores. Canadian Geriatrics Society 2013-09-04 /pmc/articles/PMC3753211/ /pubmed/23983828 http://dx.doi.org/10.5770/cgj.16.76 Text en © 2013 Author(s). Published by the Canadian Geriatrics Society. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No-Derivative license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ca/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use and distribution, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Systemic Reviews/Meta-Analysis
Roy, Mononita
Molnar, Frank
Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive
title Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive
title_full Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive
title_fullStr Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive
title_full_unstemmed Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive
title_short Systematic review of the evidence for Trails B cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive
title_sort systematic review of the evidence for trails b cut-off scores in assessing fitness-to-drive
topic Systemic Reviews/Meta-Analysis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3753211/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23983828
http://dx.doi.org/10.5770/cgj.16.76
work_keys_str_mv AT roymononita systematicreviewoftheevidencefortrailsbcutoffscoresinassessingfitnesstodrive
AT molnarfrank systematicreviewoftheevidencefortrailsbcutoffscoresinassessingfitnesstodrive