Prediction of driving ability in people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis using the stroke driver screening assessment

Driving ability and predictors for driving performance in Multiple Sclerosis: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To provide an overview of the evidence on driving ability in persons with multiple sclerosis (PwMS), specifically to (i) study the impact of MS impairment on driving ability and (ii) evaluate predictors for driving performance in MS.

METHODS

To identify relevant studies, different electronic databases were screened in accordance with PRISMA guidelines; this includes reference lists of review articles, primary studies, and trial registers for protocols. Furthermore, experts in the field were contacted. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts to identify relevant articles targeting driving in people with MS that investigated driving-related issues with a formal driving assessment (defined as either an on-road driving assessment; or naturalistic driving in a car equipped with video cameras to record the driving; or a driving simulator with a steering wheel, a brake pedal, and an accelerator).

RESULTS

Twenty-four publications, with 15 unique samples (n = 806 PwMS), were identified. To assess driving ability, on-road tests (14 papers) and driving simulators (10 papers) were used. All studies showed moderate to high study quality in the CASP assessment. About 6 to 38% of PwMS failed the on-road tests, showing difficulties in different areas of driving. Similarly, PwMS showed several problems in driving simulations. Cognitive and visual impairment appeared to most impact driving ability, but the evidence was insufficient and inconsistent.

CONCLUSION

There is an urgent need for more research and standardized guidelines for clinicians as one in five PwMS might not be able to drive safely. On-road tests may be the gold standard in assessing driving ability, but on-road protocols are heterogeneous and not infallible. Driving simulators assess driving ability in a standardized way, but without standardized routes and driving outcomes, comparability between studies is difficult. Different aspects, such as cognitive impairment or vision problems, impact driving ability negatively and should be taken into consideration when making decisions about recommending driving cessation.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

Identifier [10.17605/OSF.IO/WTG9J].

Independent outdoor mobility of persons with multiple sclerosis - A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Multiple sclerosis (MS) can manifest itself in many ways, all of which can affect the independent outdoor mobility of persons with MS (pwMS). In most studies, mobility of pwMS is defined by the ability to walk. However, mobility comprises more than walking alone. This systematic review provides an overview of the literature on several types of independent outdoor mobility of pwMS. We aimed to identify which specific factors may influence outdoor mobility and how the lives of pwMS may be affected by a reduced mobility.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed, using three databases (PubMed, PsychInfo and Web of Science). Studies had to describe a group of pwMS sclerosis and had to concern some type of mobility other than walking.

RESULTS

The 57 studies that fulfilled the criteria included in total 10,394 pwMS and in addition, 95,300 pwMS in separate prevalence study. These studies showed that pwMS as a group have a decreased fitness to drive, make use of a wheelchair or mobility scooter more often and have difficulties making use of public transport. Mobility problems especially occur in patients with cognitive problems, secondary progressive MS or high disability scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The reduced mobility may prevent pwMS participating in society. However, few studies investigating interventions or rehabilitation options to improve mobility were found in the existing literature, highlighting an until now under recognised unmet need.

Clinical Determinants of Fitness to Drive in Persons With Multiple Sclerosis: Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To critically appraise the evidence for the clinical determinants of fitness to drive in adults with multiple sclerosis (MS).

DATA SOURCES

The research librarian and lead author searched 7 databases for driving simulator and on-road studies for adults with MS published in the English language from 1991 to 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

Three reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts for studies with: cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional designs; participants, 18 years or older, with relapsing or progressive MS; visual, cognitive, or motor clinical assessments as predictors; and driving performance through simulator or fitness to drive through on-road assessment as outcomes.

DATA EXTRACTION

Using the 2017 American Academy of Neurology guidelines, reviewers independently classified each study from class I to class IV, or highest to lowest amount of rigor. For each clinical assessment, reviewers independently rated the level of confidence for predicting driving performance or fitness to drive from level A, highly probable; B, probable; C, possible; to level U, insufficient conclusions.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Through qualitative synthesis, 2 class III and 4 class IV driving simulator studies employed 24 clinical assessments with level C (n=4) or level U (n=20) confidence for predicting driving performance. Six class II and 3 class IV on-road studies employed 35 clinical assessments with level B (n=9), level C (n=22), or level U (n=4) confidence for predicting fitness to drive.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review identified mostly insufficient conclusions for predicting driving performance in driving simulator studies, and possible conclusions for predicting fitness to drive in on-road studies. The best available evidence suggests that the Stroke Driver Screening Assessment and Useful Field of View test probably predict fitness to drive in adults with MS (level B). Class I studies that compare predictors of fitness to drive with large prospective samples of adults with and without MS are necessary for highly probable conclusions.

Behind the wheel safety in palliative care: a literature review

BACKGROUND

Driving is a complex activity that requires physical abilities and adequate executive and cognitive functioning. There is concern among specialist palliative care services about patients continuing to drive despite having progressive incurable illnesses, comorbidities and medications to manage their symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the quality of literature available about driving that would apply to palliative care patients, specifically in relation to road test or simulated driving scores and neurocognitive testing.

METHOD

A literature search based on systematic principles was conducted on the Ovid Medline, PsycINFO, Embase and CINAHL database up to 14 October 2018. Patient populations with life-limiting illness such as cancer, cardiorespiratory and neurological diagnoses were included.

RESULTS

37,546 articles were screened. 14 articles satisfied the search criteria. Six studies focused on patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Four studies investigated driving ability in patients with Huntington's disease. The remaining four articles studied heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), interstitial lung disease and patients with cancer. In the road test studies, 19%-47% of patients with MS and Huntington's failed the behind-the-wheel assessment. The simulated driving scores in seven studies demonstrated statistically significant differences in errors made between study participants and controls. Divided attention was found in seven studies to be associated with poorer road-test or simulated driving ability.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights the scarcity of studies available for patients who would be known to palliative care services. For most patient groups, a battery of neurocognitive tests combined with a road-test or simulated driving assessment is still considered the best practice in determining driving safety.

Transportation and Aging: An Updated Research Agenda for Advancing Safe Mobility

This article discusses what is currently known about three important topics related to older driver safety and mobility: screening and evaluation, education and training interventions, and in-vehicle technology. Progress is being made to improve the safe mobility of older adults in these key areas; however, significant research gaps remain. This article advances the state of knowledge by identifying these gaps, and proposing further research topics will improve the lives of older adults. In addition, we discuss several themes that emerged from the review, including the need for multidisciplinary, community-wide solutions; large-scale, longitudinal studies; improved education/training for both older adults themselves and the variety of stakeholders involved in older adult transportation; and programs and interventions that are flexible and responsive to individual needs and differences.

Determinants of On-Road Driving in Multiple Sclerosis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the cognitive, visual, and motor deficits underlying poor performance on different dimensions of on-road driving in individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS).

DESIGN

Prospective cross-sectional study.

SETTING

MS clinic and driving simulator lab.

PARTICIPANTS

Active drivers (N=102) with various types of MS.

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Off-road cognitive, visual, and motor functions, as well as 13 specific driving skills. These skills were categorized into hierarchic clusters of operational, tactical, visuo-integrative, and mixed driving. Stepwise regression analysis was used to determine the off-road functions influencing performance on the on-road test and each cluster.

RESULTS

Visuospatial function (P=.002), inhibition (P=.008), binocular acuity (P=.04), vertical visual field (P=.02), and stereopsis (P=.03) best determined variance in total on-road score (unadjusted R²=.37). Attentional shift (P=.0004), stereopsis (P=.007), glare recovery (P=.047), and use of assistive devices (P=.03) best predicted the operational cluster (unadjusted R²=.28). Visuospatial function (P=.002), inhibition (P=.002), reasoning (P=.003), binocular acuity (P=.04), and stereopsis (P=.005) best determined the tactical cluster (unadjusted R²=.41). The visuo-integrative model (unadjusted R²=.12) comprised binocular acuity (P=.007) and stereopsis (P=.045). Inhibition (P=.0001) and binocular acuity (P=.001) provided the best model of the mixed cluster (unadjusted R²=.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results provide more insights into the specific impairments that influence different dimensions of on-road driving and may be used as a framework for targeted driving intervention programs in MS.