Feasibility and Validity of a Low-Cost Racing Simulator in Driving Assessment after Stroke.

There is a myriad of methodologies to assess driving performance after a stroke. These include psychometric tests, driving simulation, questionnaires, and/or road tests. Research-based driving simulators have emerged as a safe, convenient way to assess driving performance after a stroke. Such traditional research simulators are useful in recreating street traffic scenarios, but are often expensive, with limited physics models and graphics rendering. In contrast, racing simulators developed for motorsport professionals and enthusiasts offer high levels of realism, run on consumer-grade hardware, and can provide rich telemetric data. However, most offer limited simulation of traffic scenarios. This pilot study compares the feasibility of research simulation and racing simulation in a sample with minor stroke. We determine that the racing simulator is tolerated well in subjects with a minor stroke. There were correlations between research and racing simulator outcomes with psychometric tests associated with driving performance, such as the Trails Making Test Part A, Snellgrove Maze Task, and the Motricity Index. We found correlations between measures of driving speed on a complex research simulator scenario and racing simulator lap time and maximum tires off track. Finally, we present two models, using outcomes from either the research or racing simulator, predicting road test failure as linked to a previously published fitness-to-drive calculator that uses psychometric screening.

Perspectives on Tiered Older Driver Assessment in Primary Care Settings.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: Widespread screening of older drivers, with in-depth evaluation only of those who screen positive ("tiered assessment"), might efficiently balance driver safety and mobility. To inform program development, we sought to examine the perspectives of older drivers and clinicians on the concept of tiered assessment in primary care settings. DESIGN AND METHODS: Iterative focus groups and interviews with 33 community-dwelling current drivers aged ≥65 years and 8 primary care providers. We used inductive and deductive theme analysis to explore driver and clinician perspectives and to identify barriers and facilitators to establishing a tiered older driver assessment program in primary care settings. RESULTS: Four dominant themes emerged. Two themes addressed the overall concept: (a) support for the concept of tiered older driver assessment and (b) concerns about the consequences of older driver assessment and how these could affect program viability. Two themes addressed screening: (c) tension inherent in using a generalized approach to the highly individualized issue of driving and (d) logistical considerations for screening in primary care settings. IMPLICATIONS: Standardized older driver screening and referral might improve clinician-driver communication, but screening should occur in a context that includes personalized mobility counseling.

Assessment of driving-related skills prediction of unsafe driving in older adults in the office setting.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the sensitivity and specificity of the Assessment of Driving-Related Skills (ADReS), a clinical tool recommended by the American Medical Association for identifying potentially unsafe older drivers that includes tests of vision, motor function, and cognition. DESIGN: Cross-sectional observation study. SETTING: Memory assessment outpatient clinic of a university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Drivers with normal cognition (n = 47) and cognitive impairment (n = 75). MEASUREMENTS: A neurologist completed the ADReS during an office visit. Additional cognitive tests of executive, visuospatial, and visuomotor function were also performed. On a separate day, participants completed a standardized on-road test, assessed by a professional driving instructor using a global safety rating and a quantitative driving score. RESULTS: In this sample of currently active older drivers with and without cognitive impairment, measures of cognition-particularly the Trail-Making Test Part B-were more highly correlated with driving scores than other measures of function. Using recommended scoring procedures, the ADReS had a sensitivity of 0.81 for detecting impaired driving on the road test, with a specificity of 0.32 and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.57. A logistic regression model that incorporated computerized maze task and Mini-Mental State Examination scores improved overall classification accuracy, yielding a sensitivity of 0.61, a specificity of 0.84, and an AUC of 0.80. CONCLUSION: In its present form, the ADReS has limited utility as an office screen for individuals who should undergo formal driving assessment. Improved scoring methods and screening tests with greater diagnostic accuracy than the ADReS are needed for general office practice.

The American Medical Association Older Driver Curriculum for health professionals: changes in trainee confidence, attitudes, and practice behavior.

Few gerontology and geriatrics professionals receive training in driver fitness evaluation, state reporting of unfit drivers, or transportation mobility planning yet are often asked to address these concerns in the provision of care to older adults. The American Medical Association (AMA) developed an evidence-based, multi-media Curriculum to promote basic competences. This study evaluated reported changes in practice behaviors 3 months posttraining in 693 professionals trained via the AMA approach. Eight Teaching Teams, designated and trained by AMA staff, offered 22 training sessions across the United States in 2006 to 2007. Trainees (67% female; mean age 46) completed a pretest questionnaire and a posttest administered by mail. Physicians were the largest professional group (32%). Although many trainees acknowledged having conversations with patients about driving at pretest, few endorsed utilizing specific techniques recommended by the AMA prior to this training. The posttest response rate was 34% (n = 235). Significant improvements in reported attitudes, confidence, and practices were found across measured items. In particular, posttest data indicated new adoption of in-office screening techniques, chart documentation of driver safety concerns, and transportation alternative planning strategies. Findings suggest that a well-designed, one-time continuing education intervention can enhance health professional confidence and clinical practice concerning driver fitness evaluation and mobility planning. Targeted dissemination of this Curriculum (in-person and online) will allow more to benefit in the future.

Quality improvement in long term care: the psychotropic assessment tool (PAT).

BACKGROUND: There are already a substantial number of individuals with dementia in long-term care. Many nursing home patients have difficult behaviors and are currently managed with psychotropic medications. Medications for behavior need to be titrated and monitored over time for efficacy and safety, and subsequently tapered if ineffective. Some of these medications are not without risk, and that risk-benefit ratio should be discussed and documented with the family. Currently, we are not aware of any quality improvement process that has been developed in long-term care to address these issues. OBJECTIVES: To describe the process of a novel quality improvement intervention that was designed to improve documentation in the medical record and interdisciplinary communication of the usefulness and possible side effects of psychotropic agents used in the management of difficult behaviors for dementia. DESIGN: Retrospective review of the chart and quality improvement records in a long-term care facility. SETTING: An academic long-term care facility that specializes in dementia care in St. Louis, MO. METHODS: The quality improvement team created a process and a form named the Psychotropic Assessment Tool (PAT) to document current behavioral symptoms of the residents; determine whether the resident was on psychotropic agents; identify whether agents had been initiated, titrated, and/or tapered if appropriate; and whether there were any side effects related to the behavioral medications. A letter was created and provided to the surrogate decision maker that described the risk-benefit ratio of the use of antipsychotic agents when these drugs were prescribed. Recommendations from the quality improvement team were provided to the primary care physician. After 1 year of this process, we reviewed the medical charts and quality improvement PAT forms of all residents. We documented the use of psychotropic agents before and after initiating the PAT process, the presence of current behavioral symptoms, the presence of possible side effects, and the recommendations of the interdisciplinary team that met after the monthly quality improvement meetings. RESULTS: A total of 110 patients were included in this study, which reviewed psychotropic drug use between July 2005 and July 2006. The mean age of the residents was 83.8 +/- 7.5 years. All residents had a diagnosis of dementia. Mean MMSE score was 13.5 +/- 7.3. The prevalence of potential problems that could have been associated with psychotropic drug use was not insignificant and included falls (45%), weight loss (16%), weight gain (7%), dizziness (9%), and sedation (5%). However, behaviors that might warrant psychotropic drug use were not uncommon and included active depression (12%), anxiety (24%), hallucinations (11%), disruptive behavior (21%) and delusions (21%). The percentage of residents on antipsychotics changed from 26.5% pre-PAT process to 25.2% post-PAT process; those on anxiolytics changed from 6.0% to 4.0%. There was a change in hypnotics from 2.6% to 3.4%. Antidepressant usage remained the same at 55%. The PAT CHAT discussion resulted in recommendation of medication changes in 25% of residents. CONCLUSIONS: The initiation of this quality improvement process using the PAT led to improved chart documentation and interdisciplinary communication between the team, primary care physicians, and families. Further studies are needed to determine whether this process can impact use of psychotropic agents, improve quality of life, decrease adverse drug events, and/or reduce medical-legal risk.