Use of the MMSE in the Prediction of Driving Fitness: Relevance of Specific Subtests.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the association between performance on subtests of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and driving competence in people with cognitive impairment (CI) as well as those with no cognitive impairment (NCI). DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Participants referred for a DriveWise evaluation at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts, were included in the study. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 419 participants referred for a DriveWise evaluation was studied. The average age of the sample was 77.69 years. In this study, people with an MMSE score lower than 25 were included in the CI group; 41% of participants had CI. MEASUREMENTS: All participants underwent mental status screening with the MMSE, and all underwent a 45-minute road test modeled after the Washington University Road Test adapted for use in Boston streets. RESULTS: In both groups, poor road test performance was associated with low scores on the MMSE. In drivers with CI, MMSE total score and performance on the attention subtest were significantly lower for those who failed the road test. In drivers with NCI, the MMSE total score and orientation subtests were significantly lower for those who failed the road test. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians working with older people should know that the MMSE is an effective tool to screen for driving safety, but MMSE subtests are differentially sensitive to driving safety in people with and without CI. Poor performance on specific MMSE subtests may prompt further evaluation of driving competence with a road test. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:790-793, 2019.

Errors versus speed on the trail making test: Relevance to driving performance.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Many studies have demonstrated that speed to complete items on the Trail Making Tests (TMT A and TMT B) is useful in the prediction of driving safety. However, there is no consensus regarding optimal "cut scores" to discriminate between safe and unsafe drivers. In this study, we examine TMT speed and errors in drivers referred for a road test. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: Patients referred for a DriveWise® evaluation at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts. PARTICIPANTS: Drivers age 65 or older were included (total n = 373). Forty-five percent of the sample had been diagnosed with Cognitive Impairment (CI) whereas the remaining participants were in the No Cognitive Impairment (NCI) group. MEASUREMENTS: TMT Parts A & B, Folstein Mini Mental Status Examination, Washington University Road Test. RESULTS: CI drivers with TMT A speed exceeding 46 s were more likely to fail the road test whereas TMT B speed was not a sensitive metric in this group. In the No Cognitive Impairment (NCI) group, TMT B speed exceeding 131 s predicted driving impairment whereas TMT A speed was not sensitive. Error scores were not useful in the determination of driving fitness for either group. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides useful criteria for health providers working with older people in the determination of driving fitness. Results suggest that TMT speed, but not error rate, is associated with road test performance. Based on our work, we advocate that pre-existing dementia should be taken into consideration when using TMT performance as a screen for driving.

Validity of the mini-mental state examination and the montreal cognitive assessment in the prediction of driving test outcome.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of two cognitive screening measures, the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), in predicting driving test outcome for individuals with and without cognitive impairment. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A clinical driving evaluation program at a teaching hospital in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Adult drivers who underwent assessment with the MMSE and MoCA as part of a comprehensive driving evaluation between 2010 and 2014 (N=92). MEASUREMENTS: MMSE and MoCA total scores were independent variables. The outcome measure was performance on a standardized road test. RESULTS: A preestablished diagnosis of cognitive impairment enhanced the validity of cognitive screening measures in the identification of at-risk drivers. In individuals with cognitive impairment there was a significant relationship between MoCA score and on-road outcome. Specifically, an individual was 1.36 times as likely to fail the road test with each 1-point decrease in MoCA score. No such relationship was detected in those without a diagnosis of cognitive impairment. CONCLUSION: For individuals who have not been diagnosed with cognitive impairment, neither the MMSE nor the MoCA can be reliably used as an indicator of driving risk, but for individuals with a preestablished diagnosis of cognitive impairment, the MoCA is a useful tool in this regard. A score on the MoCA of 18 or less should raise concerns about driving safety.

The driving competence of 90-year-old drivers: from a hospital-based driving clinic.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the performance on a standardized driving evaluation of a group of oldest old adults (age 90-97) against younger old adults (age 80-87) and examine whether the same cognitive variables and brake reaction time performance were associated with pass-fail status on a road test in both groups. Secondary objectives focused on an examination of the specific driving errors of both groups. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in the setting of a clinical driving evaluation program at an academic medical center in the United States. In this study we examined the performance of 88 participants (27 age 90-97 and 61 age 80-87) who completed comprehensive driving evaluations between 1997 and 2011. The outcome variable was performance on a standardized road test. Measures included the Trail Making Test (TMT), the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), and brake reaction time (BRT). An exploratory analysis of the possible predictive value of specific MMSE subtests was also performed. RESULTS: Results indicate that the oldest old adults (90-97 years old) were at no greater driving risk than were a younger old (80-87 years old) cohort and made similar types and frequency of driving errors. TMT-B time was associated with pass-fail status in both groups. MMSE attention items discriminated between safe and unsafe younger old drivers, and MMSE orientation items were associated with pass-fail status in the oldest old cohort. CONCLUSION: Drivers age 90 and above were at no greater driving risk than those one decade younger. MMSE orientation questions may be useful to assist in identifying which oldest old drivers could benefit from a comprehensive driving evaluation including an on-road test.

Can we improve clinical prediction of at-risk older drivers?

OBJECTIVES: To conduct a pilot study to evaluate the predictive value of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment test (MoCA) and a brief test of multiple object tracking (MOT) relative to other tests of cognition and attention in identifying at-risk older drivers, and to determine which combination of tests provided the best overall prediction. METHODS: Forty-seven currently licensed drivers (58-95 years), primarily from a clinical driving evaluation program, participated. Their performance was measured on: (1) a screening test battery, comprising MoCA, MOT, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Trail-Making Test, visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and Useful Field of View (UFOV) and (2) a standardized road test. RESULTS: Eighteen participants were rated at-risk on the road test. UFOV subtest 2 was the best single predictor with an area under the curve (AUC) of .84. Neither MoCA nor MOT was a better predictor of the at-risk outcome than either MMSE or UFOV, respectively. The best four-test combination (MMSE, UFOV subtest 2, visual acuity and contrast sensitivity) was able to identify at-risk drivers with 95% specificity and 80% sensitivity (.91 AUC). CONCLUSIONS: Although the best four-test combination was much better than a single test in identifying at-risk drivers, there is still much work to do in this field to establish test batteries that have both high sensitivity and specificity.

The 4Cs (crash history, family concerns, clinical condition, and cognitive functions): a screening tool for the evaluation of the at-risk driver.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of crash history, family concerns, clinical condition, and cognitive function (the 4Cs, an interview-based screening tool for health providers working with older drivers) in identifying at-risk older drivers. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Clinical driving evaluation program at a teaching hospital in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred sixty patients who completed comprehensive driving evaluations between 2003 and 2009. MEASUREMENTS: Medical record information was used to identify component and total 4Cs scores. Other measurements included the Trail Making Test, the Mini-Mental State Examination, and brake reaction time. The outcome variable was performance on a 45-minute road test. RESULTS: Fifty participants passed the road test, 67 failed, and 43 demonstrated marginal driving skills. The relationship between 4Cs scores and road test outcome was statistically significant (P<.001). The domains most strongly associated with road test outcome were cognitive function (P<.001) and family concerns (P=.01). Scores of 9 or greater-on the 4Cs identified 84% of participants who were at risk for poor road test performance. CONCLUSION: The 4Cs, an interview based screening tool, may be a useful marker to identify at-risk older drivers.

DriveWise: an interdisciplinary hospital-based driving assessment program.

Health care professionals working with the elderly have opportunities through research and clinical practice to shape public policy affecting the older driver. This article describes DriveWise, an interdisciplinary hospital-based driving assessment program developed in response to clinical concerns about the driving safety of individuals with medical conditions. DriveWise clinicians use evidence-based, functional assessments to determine driving competence. In addition, the program was designed to meet the emotional needs of individuals whose driving safety has been called into question. To date, approximately 380 participants have been assessed through DriveWise. The following report details the DriveWise mission, DriveWise team members, and road test results. We continue to refine the assessment process to promote safety and support the dignity and independence of all participants. The DriveWise interdisciplinary approach to practice is a concrete example of how gerontological education across professions can have direct benefits to the older adult.

The use of the Color Trails Test in the assessment of driver competence: preliminary report of a culture-fair instrument.

Studies have shown that the Trail Making Test (TMT) predicts real-world driving performance in individuals who have cognitive deficits. However, because this test requires knowledge of the Latin alphabet, the TMT may not be appropriate for individuals who are illiterate or for those whom English is not their primary language. Because the Color Trails Test (CTT) is not influenced by knowledge of the alphabet, the CTT may be a culture-fair alternative to the TMT. To date, the utility of the CTT in the evaluation of driver competence has not been established. In the current study, individuals referred for a comprehensive driving assessment underwent testing with the TMT and CTT. The results suggest that the CTT and the TMT provide similar information regarding road-test outcome. Thus, the CTT may be a culture-fair alternative to the TMT in the assessment of driver competence.