Cargando…

VISUAL PROCESSING SPEEDS DIFFERENTIATE OUTCOMES OF DRIVING EVALUATIONS OF CONTROLS AND MEDICALLY AT RISK DRIVERS

Visual processing speed is considered a critical factor for determining driving capacity in older adults. The specific research questions were: 1) is there a statistically significant difference in performance time between the medically at-risk (n=35) and controls (N=242), 2) does the type of medica...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dickerson, Anne, Penna, Victoria
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9767204/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igac059.2282
_version_ 1784853912299241472
author Dickerson, Anne
Penna, Victoria
author_facet Dickerson, Anne
Penna, Victoria
author_sort Dickerson, Anne
collection PubMed
description Visual processing speed is considered a critical factor for determining driving capacity in older adults. The specific research questions were: 1) is there a statistically significant difference in performance time between the medically at-risk (n=35) and controls (N=242), 2) does the type of medical condition (e.g., neurological, cognition, complex medical conditions) differentiate performance, and 3) can visual processing speed differentiate between fit and unfit drivers. A cross sectional quasi-experimental design was used to compare the visual processing reaction times between at-risk adult drivers and healthy controls. Participants were medically-at-risk drivers referred for a comprehensive driving evaluation to determine their fitness to drive. The Vision Coach™ "Full-Field-60" task was used to collect reaction times which required participants to tap 60 randomly illuminated red dots. One practice trial was followed by three testing trials that were averaged together. At-risk participants were divided into three diagnostic categories. Fitness-to-drive outcomes were pass, fail, or restrictions. A propensity score method based on age and gender was used to account for the difference in sample sizes by weighting the participants from the two studies for a fair comparison between the two groups. Independent t-tests found a significant difference t(275)=-6.42, p=< 0.001 in trial times between healthy controls (M=53 + 10.82) and medically-at-risk adults (M=72 + 17.04). No significant difference was found between the diagnostic groups (p=0.141), but the Vision Coach™ differentiated between those who "passed" and those who "failed" a driving evaluation (F(2,32)=8.28, p=0.001.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9767204
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97672042022-12-21 VISUAL PROCESSING SPEEDS DIFFERENTIATE OUTCOMES OF DRIVING EVALUATIONS OF CONTROLS AND MEDICALLY AT RISK DRIVERS Dickerson, Anne Penna, Victoria Innov Aging Abstracts Visual processing speed is considered a critical factor for determining driving capacity in older adults. The specific research questions were: 1) is there a statistically significant difference in performance time between the medically at-risk (n=35) and controls (N=242), 2) does the type of medical condition (e.g., neurological, cognition, complex medical conditions) differentiate performance, and 3) can visual processing speed differentiate between fit and unfit drivers. A cross sectional quasi-experimental design was used to compare the visual processing reaction times between at-risk adult drivers and healthy controls. Participants were medically-at-risk drivers referred for a comprehensive driving evaluation to determine their fitness to drive. The Vision Coach™ "Full-Field-60" task was used to collect reaction times which required participants to tap 60 randomly illuminated red dots. One practice trial was followed by three testing trials that were averaged together. At-risk participants were divided into three diagnostic categories. Fitness-to-drive outcomes were pass, fail, or restrictions. A propensity score method based on age and gender was used to account for the difference in sample sizes by weighting the participants from the two studies for a fair comparison between the two groups. Independent t-tests found a significant difference t(275)=-6.42, p=< 0.001 in trial times between healthy controls (M=53 + 10.82) and medically-at-risk adults (M=72 + 17.04). No significant difference was found between the diagnostic groups (p=0.141), but the Vision Coach™ differentiated between those who "passed" and those who "failed" a driving evaluation (F(2,32)=8.28, p=0.001. Oxford University Press 2022-12-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9767204/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igac059.2282 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Abstracts
Dickerson, Anne
Penna, Victoria
VISUAL PROCESSING SPEEDS DIFFERENTIATE OUTCOMES OF DRIVING EVALUATIONS OF CONTROLS AND MEDICALLY AT RISK DRIVERS
title VISUAL PROCESSING SPEEDS DIFFERENTIATE OUTCOMES OF DRIVING EVALUATIONS OF CONTROLS AND MEDICALLY AT RISK DRIVERS
title_full VISUAL PROCESSING SPEEDS DIFFERENTIATE OUTCOMES OF DRIVING EVALUATIONS OF CONTROLS AND MEDICALLY AT RISK DRIVERS
title_fullStr VISUAL PROCESSING SPEEDS DIFFERENTIATE OUTCOMES OF DRIVING EVALUATIONS OF CONTROLS AND MEDICALLY AT RISK DRIVERS
title_full_unstemmed VISUAL PROCESSING SPEEDS DIFFERENTIATE OUTCOMES OF DRIVING EVALUATIONS OF CONTROLS AND MEDICALLY AT RISK DRIVERS
title_short VISUAL PROCESSING SPEEDS DIFFERENTIATE OUTCOMES OF DRIVING EVALUATIONS OF CONTROLS AND MEDICALLY AT RISK DRIVERS
title_sort visual processing speeds differentiate outcomes of driving evaluations of controls and medically at risk drivers
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9767204/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igac059.2282
work_keys_str_mv AT dickersonanne visualprocessingspeedsdifferentiateoutcomesofdrivingevaluationsofcontrolsandmedicallyatriskdrivers
AT pennavictoria visualprocessingspeedsdifferentiateoutcomesofdrivingevaluationsofcontrolsandmedicallyatriskdrivers