Retrospective cohort study of accident outcomes for individuals who have successfully undergone driver assessment following stroke

Effectiveness of road safety interventions: An evidence and gap map

Background

Road Traffic injuries (RTI) are among the top ten leading causes of death in the world resulting in 1.35 million deaths every year, about 93% of which occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Despite several global resolutions to reduce traffic injuries, they have continued to grow in many countries. Many high-income countries have successfully reduced RTI by using a public health approach and implementing evidence-based interventions. As many LMICs develop their highway infrastructure, adopting a similar scientific approach towards road safety is crucial. The evidence also needs to be evaluated to assess external validity because measures that have worked in high-income countries may not translate equally well to other contexts. An evidence gap map for RTI is the first step towards understanding what evidence is available, from where, and the key gaps in knowledge.

Objectives

The objective of this evidence gap map (EGM) is to identify existing evidence from all effectiveness studies and systematic reviews related to road safety interventions. In addition, the EGM identifies gaps in evidence where new primary studies and systematic reviews could add value. This will help direct future research and discussions based on systematic evidence towards the approaches and interventions which are most effective in the road safety sector. This could enable the generation of evidence for informing policy at global, regional or national levels.

Search Methods

The EGM includes systematic reviews and impact evaluations assessing the effect of interventions for RTI reported in academic databases, organization websites, and grey literature sources. The studies were searched up to December 2019.

Selection Criteria

The interventions were divided into five broad categories: (a) human factors (e.g., enforcement or road user education), (b) road design, infrastructure and traffic control, (c) legal and institutional framework, (d) post-crash pre-hospital care, and (e) vehicle factors (except car design for occupant protection) and protective devices. Included studies reported two primary outcomes: fatal crashes and non-fatal injury crashes; and four intermediate outcomes: change in use of seat belts, change in use of helmets, change in speed, and change in alcohol/drug use. Studies were excluded if they did not report injury or fatality as one of the outcomes.

Data Collection and Analysis

The EGM is presented in the form of a matrix with two primary dimensions: interventions (rows) and outcomes (columns). Additional dimensions are country income groups, region, quality level for systematic reviews, type of study design used (e.g., case-control), type of road user studied (e.g., pedestrian, cyclists), age groups, and road type. The EGM is available online where the matrix of interventions and outcomes can be filtered by one or more dimensions. The webpage includes a bibliography of the selected studies and titles and abstracts available for preview. Quality appraisal for systematic reviews was conducted using a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews, AMSTAR 2.

Main Results

The EGM identified 1859 studies of which 322 were systematic reviews, 7 were protocol studies and 1530 were impact evaluations. Some studies included more than one intervention, outcome, study method, or study region. The studies were distributed among intervention categories as: human factors (n = 771), road design, infrastructure and traffic control (n = 661), legal and institutional framework (n = 424), post-crash pre-hospital care (n = 118) and vehicle factors and protective devices (n = 111). Fatal crashes as outcomes were reported in 1414 records and non-fatal injury crashes in 1252 records. Among the four intermediate outcomes, speed was most commonly reported (n = 298) followed by alcohol (n = 206), use of seatbelts (n = 167), and use of helmets (n = 66). Ninety-six percent of the studies were reported from high-income countries (HIC), 4.5% from upper-middle-income countries, and only 1.4% from lower-middle and low-income countries. There were 25 systematic reviews of high quality, 4 of moderate quality, and 293 of low quality.

Authors' Conclusions

The EGM shows that the distribution of available road safety evidence is skewed across the world. A vast majority of the literature is from HICs. In contrast, only a small fraction of the literature reports on the many LMICs that are fast expanding their road infrastructure, experiencing rapid changes in traffic patterns, and witnessing growth in road injuries. This bias in literature explains why many interventions that are of high importance in the context of LMICs remain poorly studied. Besides, many interventions that have been tested only in HICs may not work equally effectively in LMICs. Another important finding was that a large majority of systematic reviews are of low quality. The scarcity of evidence on many important interventions and lack of good quality evidence-synthesis have significant implications for future road safety research and practice in LMICs. The EGM presented here will help identify priority areas for researchers, while directing practitioners and policy makers towards proven interventions.

Driving Rehabilitation for Stroke Patients: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Driving enables stroke survivors to freely participate in social integration. The purpose of this review was to summarize the evidence for the therapeutic effects of driving rehabilitation for patients when they return to driving after stroke and evaluate the predictors of returning to driving to identify the factors impacting their driving rehabilitation. This study employed a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed and four other databases were searched until 31 December 2022. Our review included randomized controlled trials (RCT) and non-RCTs that investigated driving rehabilitation for stroke and observational studies. A total of 16 studies (two non-RCT and 14 non-RCT) were reviewed; two RCTs investigated the effect of driving rehabilitation with a simulator system, and eight and six non-RCTS evaluated the predictive factors of driving return post-stroke and compared the effects of driving rehabilitation for stroke, respectively. The National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores and having paid employment were significant predictors of resuming driving after stroke. The results suggest that NIHSS, MMSE, and paid employment are predictors of returning to driving post-stroke. Future research should investigate the effect of driving rehabilitation on the resumption of driving in patients with stroke.

Driving and visual deficits in stroke patients

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to conduct an exploratory assessment of visual impairment following stroke, and to discuss the possibilities of reintroducing patients to the activity of driving.

METHODS

The Useful Field of View test was used to assess visual processing and visual attention.

RESULTS

A total of 18 patients were included in the study, and were assigned to either the drive group (n = 9) or the intention group (n = 9). In the drive group, one patient was categorized as moderate-to-high risk; whereas, in the intention group, one patient was categorized as low-to-moderate risk. Additionally, two patients in the intention group were categorized as high risk. The patients did not perceive their visual deficits as a limitation.

CONCLUSION

Visual attention is an interference factor in terms of the safe performance of driving after a stroke. All patients showed a high level of interest for the independence provided through being able to drive.