Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Driving Performance (driving + performance)
Selected AbstractsEffects of Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment on driving ability: a controlled clinical study by simulated driving testINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY, Issue 3 2009Cristina Frittelli Abstract Objective To assess the effects of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) on simulated car driving ability. Methods Twenty patients with a probable AD of mild severity (Clinical Dementia Rating, CDR,=,1) were compared with 20 subjects with MCI (CD,=,0.5), and a group of age-matched neurologically normal controls on a driving simulation task. Measures of driving competence included the length of run, the number of infractions (omission of stop at pedestrian crossings, speed limits violation), the number of stops at traffic lights, the mean time to collision, and the number of off-road events. Results in the driving competence measures were correlated with scores obtained from simple visual reaction times and mini-mental state examination (MMSE). Results The patients with mild AD performed significantly worse than MCI subjects and controls on three simulated driving measures, length of run and mean time to collision (p,<,0.001), and number of off-road events (p,<,0.01). MCI subjects had only a significantly shorter time-to-collision than healthy controls (p,<,0.001). Simple visual reaction times were significantly longer (p,<,0.001) in patients with AD, compared to MCI and healthy controls, and showed a borderline significant relation (p,=,0.05) with simulated driving scores. Driving performance in the three groups did not significantly correlate with MMSE score as measure of overall cognitive function. Conclusions Mild AD significantly impaired simulated driving fitness, while MCI limitedly affected driving performance. Unsafe driving behaviour in AD patients was not predicted by MMSE scores. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Simulated driving performance following prolonged wakefulness and alcohol consumption: separate and combined contributions to impairmentJOURNAL OF SLEEP RESEARCH, Issue 3 2000Arnedt The separate and combined effects of prolonged wakefulness and alcohol were compared on measures of subjective sleepiness, simulated driving performance and drivers' ability to judge impairment. Twenty-two males aged between 19 and 35 years were tested on four occasions. Subjects drove for 30 min on a simulated driving task under conditions determined by the factorial combination of 16 and 20 h of wakefulness and blood alcohol concentrations of 0.00 and 0.08%. The simulated driving session took place 30 min postingestion; subjects in the two alcohol conditions participated in a second 30-min driving session 90-min postingestion. Subjects made simultaneous ratings of their impairment while driving and retrospective ratings at the end of each test session. Subjective sleepiness measures were completed before and after each driving session. The combination of 20 h of prolonged wakefulness and alcohol produced significantly lower ratings of subjective sleepiness and driving performance that was worse, but not significantly so, than would be expected from the additive effects of each condition alone. Driving performance was always worse in the second driving session, during the elimination phase of alcohol metabolism, despite blood alcohol concentrations being lower than during the first driving session. There was a modest association between perceived and actual impairments in driving performance following prolonged wakefulness and alcohol. The findings suggest that the combination of prolonged wakefulness and alcohol consumption produced greater decrements in simulated driving performance than each condition alone and that drivers have only a modest ability to appreciate the magnitude of their impairment. [source] Glare susceptibility test results correlate with temporal safety margin when executing turns across approaching vehicles in simulated low-sun conditionsOPHTHALMIC AND PHYSIOLOGICAL OPTICS, Issue 5 2007Rob Gray Abstract The purpose of this study was to compare the results of a laboratory glare susceptibility test with the execution of turns at an intersection (turns that required the driver to cross a lane containing approaching traffic). We measured glare susceptibility by means of low and high-contrast letter charts with and without a glare source. Driving performance in the absence and presence of simulated low sun was assessed using a simulator. In particular, we measured the difference between the time taken to complete a turn across the path of an approaching vehicle and the time to collision (TTC) with the approaching vehicle (the safety margin). The presence of glare resulted in a significant reduction in the safety margin used by drivers (by 0.65 s on average) and the mean number of collisions was significantly higher in the glare conditions than in the non-glare conditions. The effect of glare was larger for low-contrast than for high-contrast oncoming vehicles. Older drivers (45,60 years) had a significantly greater reduction in safety margin than younger drivers (19,29 years), though there was a large inter-individual variability in both age groups. We suggest that the reduction in retinal image contrast caused by low-sun caused drivers to overestimate the TTC with approaching vehicles. [source] Lack of effects between rupatadine 10,mg and placebo on actual driving performance of healthy volunteersHUMAN PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY: CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL, Issue 5 2007Eric Vuurman Abstract Introduction Rupatadine fumarate is a potent, selective, histamine H1 -receptor antagonist and PAF inhibitor with demonstrated efficacy for the relief of allergic rhinitis. Rupatadine does not easily cross the blood,brain barrier and is believed to be non-sedating at therapeutic doses. Consequently, rupatadine should show no impairment on car driving. Objective This study compared the acute effects of rupatadine, relative to placebo and hydroxyzine (as an active control), on healthy subjects' driving performance. Methods Twenty subjects received a single dose of rupatadine 10,mg, hydroxyzine 50,mg, or placebo in each period of this randomized, double-blind, three-way crossover study. Two hours postdosing, subjects operated a specially instrumented vehicle in tests designed to measure their driving ability. Before and after the driving tests ratings of sedation were recorded. Results There was no significant difference between rupatadine and placebo in the primary outcome variable: standard deviation of lateral position (SDLP); however, hydroxyzine treatment significantly increased SDLP (p,<,0.001 for both comparisons). Objective (Stanford sleepiness scale) and subjective sedation ratings (Visual Analogue Scales) showed similar results: subjects reported negative effects after hydroxyzine but not after rupatadine. Conclusion Rupatadine 10,mg is not sedating and does not impair driving performance. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] A placebo controlled investigation into the effects of paroxetine and mirtazapine on measures related to car driving performanceHUMAN PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY: CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL, Issue 4 2003F. Ridout Abstract Objective To assess the effects of paroxetine and mirtazapine on psychometric performance related to car driving, including an on-the-road test of BRT. Method In a 4-way, double blind randomised crossover study, 12 healthy volunteers received paroxetine 20,mg mane, mirtazapine 15,mg/30,mg nocte (comparator), mirtazapine 15,mg mane/15,mg b.i.d.(verum) and placebo over a 5 day period with a washout period of 7 days between treatments. Psychometric assessments included ,on-the-road' BRT (BRT), CFF (CFF), CRT (CRT) and subjective measures of sedation and sleep parameters. Results Paroxetine had no significant effect on BRT compared with placebo. Although subjective ratings of sleep quality and sedation were impaired, there were significant improvements in both CFF and the recognition reaction component of CRT with paroxetine. Mirtazapine 15,mg/30,mg nocte impaired laboratory performance and some subjective tests. Mirtazapine 15 mg mane/15,mg b.i.d. improved sleep, but significantly impaired all other measures. Conclusion Paroxetine 20,mg/day has no psychomotor or behavioural toxicity and has no negative impact on BRT. Further research into the chronic and sub-chronic effects of mirtazapine is needed to establish the clinical significance of these results. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Effects of Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment on driving ability: a controlled clinical study by simulated driving testINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY, Issue 3 2009Cristina Frittelli Abstract Objective To assess the effects of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) on simulated car driving ability. Methods Twenty patients with a probable AD of mild severity (Clinical Dementia Rating, CDR,=,1) were compared with 20 subjects with MCI (CD,=,0.5), and a group of age-matched neurologically normal controls on a driving simulation task. Measures of driving competence included the length of run, the number of infractions (omission of stop at pedestrian crossings, speed limits violation), the number of stops at traffic lights, the mean time to collision, and the number of off-road events. Results in the driving competence measures were correlated with scores obtained from simple visual reaction times and mini-mental state examination (MMSE). Results The patients with mild AD performed significantly worse than MCI subjects and controls on three simulated driving measures, length of run and mean time to collision (p,<,0.001), and number of off-road events (p,<,0.01). MCI subjects had only a significantly shorter time-to-collision than healthy controls (p,<,0.001). Simple visual reaction times were significantly longer (p,<,0.001) in patients with AD, compared to MCI and healthy controls, and showed a borderline significant relation (p,=,0.05) with simulated driving scores. Driving performance in the three groups did not significantly correlate with MMSE score as measure of overall cognitive function. Conclusions Mild AD significantly impaired simulated driving fitness, while MCI limitedly affected driving performance. Unsafe driving behaviour in AD patients was not predicted by MMSE scores. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Hearing Impairment Affects Older People's Ability to Drive in the Presence of DistractersJOURNAL OF AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY, Issue 6 2010Louise Hickson PhD OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of hearing impairment and distractibility on older people's driving ability, assessed under real-world conditions. DESIGN: Experimental cross-sectional study. SETTING: University laboratory setting and an on-road driving test. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred seven community-living adults aged 62 to 88. Fifty-five percent had normal hearing, 26% had a mild hearing impairment, and 19% had a moderate or greater impairment. MEASUREMENTS: Hearing was assessed using objective impairment measures (pure-tone audiometry, speech perception testing) and a self-report measure (Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly). Driving was assessed on a closed road circuit under three conditions: no distracters, auditory distracters, and visual distracters. RESULTS: There was a significant interaction between hearing impairment and distracters, such that people with moderate to severe hearing impairment had significantly poorer driving performance in the presence of distracters than those with normal or mild hearing impairment. CONCLUSION: Older adults with poor hearing have greater difficulty with driving in the presence of distracters than older adults with good hearing. [source] Highway driving performance and cognitive functioning the morning after bedtime and middle-of-the-night use of gaboxadol, zopiclone and zolpidemJOURNAL OF SLEEP RESEARCH, Issue 4 2009TIM R. M. LEUFKENS Summary Gaboxadol is a selective extrasynaptic GABAA receptor agonist previously in development for the treatment of insomnia. Due to its short half-life (1.5,2 h) it is expected to be free from residual effects the next morning. The present study assessed the residual effects of evening and middle-of-the-night administration of 15 mg of gaboxadol on cognitive, psychomotor and driving performance. Twenty-eight healthy volunteers entered the study with 25 (12 women; mean age 31.4 years) completing a double-blind, placebo-controlled, active-referenced five-way cross-over study. Each treatment night subjects ingested one capsule at 23:00 hours and one at 04:00 hours. Treatments were placebo at both times, 15 mg gaboxadol or 7.5 mg zopiclone followed by placebo, and placebo followed by 15 mg gaboxadol or 10 mg zolpidem. Effects on cognition and psychomotor performance were assessed between 07:30 and 08:30 hours and on driving between 09:00 and 10:00 hours. Driving, as measured by standard deviation of lateral position in an on-the-road driving test, was almost significantly (P < 0.07) impaired after evening administration of gaboxadol for the all-subjects-completed set (n = 25) but significantly (P < 0.05) in the full analysis set (n = 28). Effects of all other active treatments on driving were significant. Evening administration of gaboxadol had minor effects on divided attention only, whereas middle-of-the-night administration impaired performance significantly in all tests except memory. Zolpidem and zopiclone impaired performance significantly in every test except tracking after zopiclone; 15 mg of gaboxadol can produce minor residual effects on driving after evening administration. Administration later at night is associated with moderately impairing residual effects on driving and psychomotor performance but not on memory. [source] Simulated driving performance following prolonged wakefulness and alcohol consumption: separate and combined contributions to impairmentJOURNAL OF SLEEP RESEARCH, Issue 3 2000Arnedt The separate and combined effects of prolonged wakefulness and alcohol were compared on measures of subjective sleepiness, simulated driving performance and drivers' ability to judge impairment. Twenty-two males aged between 19 and 35 years were tested on four occasions. Subjects drove for 30 min on a simulated driving task under conditions determined by the factorial combination of 16 and 20 h of wakefulness and blood alcohol concentrations of 0.00 and 0.08%. The simulated driving session took place 30 min postingestion; subjects in the two alcohol conditions participated in a second 30-min driving session 90-min postingestion. Subjects made simultaneous ratings of their impairment while driving and retrospective ratings at the end of each test session. Subjective sleepiness measures were completed before and after each driving session. The combination of 20 h of prolonged wakefulness and alcohol produced significantly lower ratings of subjective sleepiness and driving performance that was worse, but not significantly so, than would be expected from the additive effects of each condition alone. Driving performance was always worse in the second driving session, during the elimination phase of alcohol metabolism, despite blood alcohol concentrations being lower than during the first driving session. There was a modest association between perceived and actual impairments in driving performance following prolonged wakefulness and alcohol. The findings suggest that the combination of prolonged wakefulness and alcohol consumption produced greater decrements in simulated driving performance than each condition alone and that drivers have only a modest ability to appreciate the magnitude of their impairment. [source] The Road to Danger: The Comparative Risks of Driving While Sleepy,,THE LARYNGOSCOPE, Issue 5 2001Nelson B. Powell MD Abstract Objectives/Hypothesis A large sector of the population of the United States has sleep deprivation directly leading to excessive daytime sleepiness. The prevalence of excessive daytime sleepiness in this population ranges from 0.3% to 13.3%. The consequences of even 1 to 2 hours of sleep loss nightly may result in decrements in daytime functions resulting in human error, accidents, and catastrophic events. The magnitude of risks in the workplace or on the highways resulting from sleepiness is not fully understood or appreciated by the general population. Hence, to more clearly emphasize the magnitude of these risks, we question whether mild sleep deprivation may have the same effect as alcohol on reaction times and driving performance. Study Design Nonrandomized prospective cohort investigation. Methods Sixteen healthy matched adult subjects (50% women) were stratified into two groups, sleep deprived and alcohol challenged. The sleep-deprived group was further subdivided into acute (one night without sleep) and chronic (2 h less sleep nightly for 7 d) sleep deprivation. Each group underwent baseline reaction time testing and then drove on a closed course set up to test performance. Seven days later, the group repeated this sequence after either sleep deprivation or alcohol intake. Results There were no significant between-group differences (sleep deprivation or alcohol challenged) in the changes before and after intervention for all 11 reaction time test metrics. Moreover, with few exceptions, the magnitude of change was nearly identical in the two groups, despite a mean blood alcohol concentration of 0.089 g/dL in the alcohol-challenged group. On-track driving performances were similar (P = .724) when change scores (hits and errors) between groups were compared (baseline minus final driving trial). Conclusion This comparative model suggests that the potential risks of driving while sleepy are at least as dangerous as the risks of driving illegally under the influence of alcohol. [source] Blind drunk: the effects of alcohol on inattentional blindnessAPPLIED COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 5 2006Seema L. Clifasefi Alcohol consumption is a major contributor to road accidents. While it is likely that perceptual processing deficits contribute to poorer driving performance among intoxicated individuals, we know little about alcohol's role in particular perceptual processes. For instance, we know that even sober individuals can fail to detect unexpected salient objects that appear in their visual fields, a phenomenon known as inattentionalblindness (IB; Mack & Rock, 1998). We were interested in whether these visual errors become more or less likely when subjects are under the influence of alcohol or just think that they are drunk. We told half our subjects that they had received alcohol, and half that they had received a placebo. This information was either true or false. Intoxicated subjects (regardless of what they were told) were more likely to show ,blindness' to an unexpected object in their visual field. This finding has practical implications for human performance issues such as driving and eyewitness memory, and theoretical implications for visual cognition. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] The Road to Danger: The Comparative Risks of Driving While Sleepy,,THE LARYNGOSCOPE, Issue 5 2001Nelson B. Powell MD Abstract Objectives/Hypothesis A large sector of the population of the United States has sleep deprivation directly leading to excessive daytime sleepiness. The prevalence of excessive daytime sleepiness in this population ranges from 0.3% to 13.3%. The consequences of even 1 to 2 hours of sleep loss nightly may result in decrements in daytime functions resulting in human error, accidents, and catastrophic events. The magnitude of risks in the workplace or on the highways resulting from sleepiness is not fully understood or appreciated by the general population. Hence, to more clearly emphasize the magnitude of these risks, we question whether mild sleep deprivation may have the same effect as alcohol on reaction times and driving performance. Study Design Nonrandomized prospective cohort investigation. Methods Sixteen healthy matched adult subjects (50% women) were stratified into two groups, sleep deprived and alcohol challenged. The sleep-deprived group was further subdivided into acute (one night without sleep) and chronic (2 h less sleep nightly for 7 d) sleep deprivation. Each group underwent baseline reaction time testing and then drove on a closed course set up to test performance. Seven days later, the group repeated this sequence after either sleep deprivation or alcohol intake. Results There were no significant between-group differences (sleep deprivation or alcohol challenged) in the changes before and after intervention for all 11 reaction time test metrics. Moreover, with few exceptions, the magnitude of change was nearly identical in the two groups, despite a mean blood alcohol concentration of 0.089 g/dL in the alcohol-challenged group. On-track driving performances were similar (P = .724) when change scores (hits and errors) between groups were compared (baseline minus final driving trial). Conclusion This comparative model suggests that the potential risks of driving while sleepy are at least as dangerous as the risks of driving illegally under the influence of alcohol. [source] | ||||||||||