Community mobility using private and public transportation is important for maintaining health, social participation and living well in later life. This international cross-sectional cohort study (N = 246) reported on the health and driving status of older adults from seven countries where the mobility patterns of drivers and non-drivers were compared in terms of city and rural areas, weather, as well as their respective differences in the number of out-of-home places accessed and quality of life. Older adults participated in a semi-structured interview and completed four standardised instruments: the EQ-5D-5L, modified PULSES health profile, modified Transportation Questionnaire, and the Transport – Participation in Activities and Places Outside the Home. Results suggested inclement weather and place of residence negatively impacted out-of-home activities but did not increase use of public transportation. Drivers accessed more out-of-home activities than non-drivers, suggesting higher community participation among this group, and quality of life was generally high among all participants, but slightly higher for drivers. Findings indicate that a complex myriad of factors can influence community mobility in older adults and further investigations are needed to understand patterns of transport in later life, particularly with regard to those factors that promote and maintain transport mobility, and relationships between transport mobility, community participation and quality of life.

The purpose of this study was to examine whether vehicle type based on size (car vs. other = truck/van/SUV) had an impact on the speeding, acceleration, and braking patterns of older male and female drivers (70 years and older) from a Canadian longitudinal study. The primary hypothesis was that older adults driving larger vehicles (e.g., trucks, SUVs, or vans) would be more likely to speed than those driving cars. Participants (n = 493) had a device installed in their vehicles that recorded their everyday driving. The findings suggest that the type of vehicle driven had little or no impact on per cent of time speeding or on the braking and accelerating patterns of older drivers. Given that the propensity for exceeding the speed limit was high among these older drivers, regardless of vehicle type, future research should examine what effect this behaviour has on older-driver road safety.

Objectives: Guidelines on return-to-driving after traumatic brain injury (TBI) are scarce. Since driving requires the coordination of multiple cognitive, perceptual, and psychomotor functions, neuropsychological testing may offer an estimate of driving ability. To examine this, a meta-analysis of the relationship between neuropsychological testing and driving ability after TBI was performed. Methods: Hedge’s g and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a random effects model. Analyses were performed on cognitive domains and individual tests. Meta-regressions examined the influence of study design, demographic, and clinical factors on effect sizes. Results: Eleven studies were included in the meta-analysis. Executive functions had the largest effect size (g = 0.60 [0.39–0.80]), followed by verbal memory (g = 0.49 [0.27–0.71]), processing speed/attention (g = 0.48 [0.29–0.67]), and visual memory (g = 0.43 [0.14–0.71]). Of the individual tests, Useful Field of Vision (UFOV) divided attention (g = 1.12 [0.52–1.72]), Trail Making Test B (g = 0.75 [0.42–1.08]), and UFOV selective attention (g = 0.67 [0.22–1.12]) had the largest effects. The effect sizes for Choice Reaction Time test and Trail Making Test A were g = 0.63 (0.09–1.16) and g = 0.58 (0.10–1.06), respectively. Years post injury (β = 0.11 [0.02–0.21] and age (β = 0.05 [0.009–0.09]) emerged as significant predictors of effect sizes (both p < .05). Conclusions: These results provide preliminary evidence of associations between neuropsychological test performance and driving ability after moderate to severe TBI and highlight moderating effects of demographic and clinical factors.

Transport is the invisible glue that holds our lives together, an under-recognized contributor to economic, social and personal well-being. In public health terms, the medical profession had previously allowed itself to focus almost exclusively on the downsides of transport. However, the research basis for transport, driving and ageing is steadily evolving and has important academic and practical considerations for gerontologists and geriatricians. For gerontologists, teasing out the critical role of transport in the health and well-being of older people is an imperative, as well as the key challenges inherent in transitioning from driving to not driving. The safe crash record of a group with significant multi-morbidity allows us to focus on the remarkable strategic and adaptive skills of older people. From a policy perspective, strictures on older drivers are an exemplar of institutionalized ageism. For geriatricians, a key challenge is to develop strategies for including transportation in our clinical assessments, formulating effective strategies for assessment of medical fitness to drive, incorporating enabling techniques, giving due consideration to ethical and legal aspects, and developing and promoting multi-modality and alternative transportation options.

Demographically adjusted norms generally enhance accuracy of inferences based on neuropsychological assessment. However, we hypothesized that demographic corrections diminish predictive accuracy for real-world activities with absolute cognitive demands. Driving ability was assessed with a 45-minute drive along a standardized on-road route in participants aged 65+ (24 healthy elderly, 26 probable Alzheimer’s disease, 33 Parkinson’s disease). Neuropsychological measures included: Trail-Making A and B, Complex Figure, Benton Visual Retention, and Block Design tests. A multiple regression model with raw neuropsychological scores was significantly predictive of driving errors (R2 = .199, p = .005); a model with demographically adjusted scores was not (R2 = .113, p = .107). Raw scores were more highly correlated with driving errors than were adjusted scores for each neuropsychological measure, and among healthy elderly and Parkinson’s patients. When predicting real-world activities that depend on absolute levels of cognitive abilities regardless of demographic considerations, predictive accuracy is diminished by demographic corrections. (JINS, 2010, 16, 679–686.)

Objective: Psychiatric illness and the use of psychotropic medication are recognised as factors that may impair driving ability. Clinicians in the UK have a legal duty to advise patients on the effects of illness and prescribed medication on driving ability. Although clinicians in Ireland have no equivalent legal obligations, good medical practice suggests that doctors should be aware of whether patients are active drivers, and issue appropriate advice, supported by adequate documentation in clinical notes.

Method: The initial phase of the study analysed 44 outpatient records and 48 discharge records to ascertain the level of documentation regarding driving status, and advice given to patients regarding the effect of illness or medication on driving ability. The second phase involved distribution of an anonymous questionnaire to 18 psychiatrists employed in the acute psychiatric unit setting.

Results: Although there was minimal documentation regarding the potential effect of illness on driving ability, more than 50% of case notes revealed documented advice to patients regarding side-effects of medication and driving ability. Over 50% of case notes contained advice about medication compliance, but none contained cautionary advice about operating machinery. All psychiatrists admitted not being aware of the driving status of every patient they reviewed. Over 50% admitted to advising patients of the effect of illness or medication on driving ability, but fewer reported documenting this advice on every occasion. All psychiatrists reported that they would benefit from training in this area.

Conclusion: This study suggests that there is underdocumentation of advice given to patients regarding the effect of their symptoms or medication on driving ability. Clinicians need to improve their awareness of patients' driving status, in addition to receiving training on what their responsibilities are in this regard.

Certain medical conditions may affect one's ability to drive safely. In the United Kingdom, the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) issues guidelines outlining which medical conditions drivers must notify them of. In order to assess our knowledge of, and ability to apply, the current DVLA guidelines with regard to otolaryngological conditions, a postal survey was sent to all otolaryngologists in Scotland. The responses obtained suggest that the current DVLA guidelines are not well understood or easily applied, and it is recommended that all otolaryngologists familiarize themselves with these guidelines in order to better advise their patients with regard to driving.