0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Epidemiology and Biostatistics |

Visual Risk Factors for Crash Involvement in Older Drivers With Cataract FREE

Cynthia Owsley, PhD, MSPH; Beth T. Stalvey, MPH, PhD; Jennifer Wells, LBSW, CDRS; Michael E. Sloane, PhD; Gerald McGwin Jr, PhD
[+] Author Affiliations

From the Department of Ophthalmology (Drs Owsley and Stalvey and Ms Wells) and the Section of Trauma, Burn and Critical Care, Department of Surgery(Dr McGwin), School of Medicine; the Department of Health Behavior (Dr Stalvey) and the Department of Epidemiology (Dr McGwin), School of Public Health; and the Department of Psychology (Dr Sloane), School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of Alabama at Birmingham. Dr Owsley is a Research to Prevent Blindness senior scientific investigator.


Arch Ophthalmol. 2001;119(6):881-887. doi:10.1001/archopht.119.6.881.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Background  The Impact of Cataracts on Mobility project has previously demonstrated that older drivers with cataract have an elevated risk of motor vehicle collision.

Objective  To examine what types of visual impairment serve as a basis of the increased crash risk of older drivers with cataract.

Methods and Design  A cross-sectional analysis was performed on 274 older drivers with cataract and 103 older drivers free of cataract recruited through 12 eye care clinics for the purposes of the Impact of Cataracts on Mobility project, a prospective study on driving mobility in older adults with cataract. Tests measured visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and disability glare for each eye separately using habitual distance correction. The dependent variable was involvement in at least 1 state-recorded, at-fault vehicle crash during the 5 years prior to study enrollment.

Results  Logistic regression evaluated associations (odds ratios [ORs]) between visual function and crash involvement. Better and worse eye models defined on the basis of visual acuity were developed. Associations between each type of visual function and crash involvement were adjusted for age, sex, driving exposure, cognitive status, and other types of visual function. For both the better and worse eye models, contrast sensitivity was independently associated with crash involvement, whereas visual acuity and disability glare were not. Drivers with a history of crash involvement were 8 times more likely to have a serious contrast sensitivity deficit in the worse eye (defined as a Pelli-Robson score of 1.25 or less) than those who were crash-free (OR = 7.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.55-39.79); this association was weaker for the better eye but still statistically significant (OR = 3.78; 95% CI, 1.15-12.48). Crash-involved drivers were 6 times more likely to have severe contrast sensitivity impairment in both eyes (OR = 5.78; 95% CI, 1.87-17.86) than crash-free drivers. A severe contrast sensitivity deficit in only 1 eye was still significantly associated with crash involvement (OR = 2.70; 95% CI, 1.16-6.51).

Conclusion  Severe contrast sensitivity impairment due to cataract elevates at-fault crash risk among older drivers, even when present in only 1 eye.

OLDER PEOPLE are the fastest-growing group of drivers on the road, representing a larger percentage of the driving public than ever before and driving more miles per year than previous cohorts of older adults.1 Older drivers have a higher crash rate per mile driven compared with other age groups. For every 100 000 miles driven, the crash rate of older adults is twice that of younger drivers.1,2 Once they are involved in a crash, older drivers are more likely than younger adults to receive injuries that lead to disabling conditions or death.35 Motor vehicle collision is the second most common reason for older adults' visits to emergency departments for injuries.6 A growing body of research has indicated that the causes of crashes by older drivers are multifactorial but largely due to driver error stemming from functional impairments, including sensory, cognitive, and physical deficits.1 Of particular concern is vision impairment because numerous studies find links between visual problems and increased crash involvement, self-reported driving difficulty, poor driving simulator performance, and poor on-road driving.7

Cataract is a highly prevalent condition among older persons, with almost half of adults exhibiting early cataract by age 75 years and approximately one quarter with more advanced cataract.8,9 This condition is typically bilateral, seriously compromises visual acuity and contrast sensitivity, and increases disability glare.10 Although effective treatments for cataract are now available through advances in surgical procedures and intraocular lens design, many adults must cope for an extended period with cataract-induced vision impairment until surgical removal. In the United States, this usually takes place when functional limitations become serious,11 and for many patients, visual acuity has declined to 20/40 or worse by the time of surgery. The implication is that many older adults with cataract are driving with impaired vision.

Prior studies have indicated that older drivers with cataract report more driving difficulty than those without cataract,1214 and that they avoid visually challenging situations such as driving at night, during inclement weather, and at rush hour.15 Furthermore, drivers with cataract are more likely to stop driving compared with those without cataract,16 and those who do continue to drive reduce their driving exposure (miles per week).12 Cataract surgery with intraocular lens implantation and subsequent improvement in vision is associated with decreases in reported difficulty when compared with presurgical reports.1719

The Impact of Cataracts on Mobility (ICOM) project is an ongoing prospective study on the effects of cataract surgery on driving mobility in older adults.12 We demonstrated earlier from the baseline presurgery data that older drivers with cataract have an elevated crash risk; they are 2½ times more likely to have a recent history of crash involvement than those without cataract, even after adjustments for driving exposure and comorbid medical conditions.12 The purpose of this article is to examine what types of visual impairment mediate the increased crash risk of these drivers.

SAMPLE

The ICOM sample consisted of 274 older adults with cataract in 1 or both eyes and 103 older adults who did not have cataract in either eye, as described previously.12 Those with cataract ranged in age from 55 years to 85 years (mean + SD, 71 + 6 years), with 46% female, 86% white and of non-Hispanic origin, and 14% African American. The noncataract subjects ranged in age from 55 years to 79 years (mean + SD, 67+ 6 years); 52% were female, with 84% white and 16% African American.

All subjects with cataract were required to meet the following inclusion criteria: (1) cataract in 1 or both eyes with best-corrected visual acuity of 20/40 or worse in 1 or both eyes as indicated by the medical record; (2) no previous cataract surgery in either eye; (3) a primary diagnosis of cataract in the medical record; (4) living independently in the community; and (5) legally licensed to drive and drove during the 5 years prior to enrollment. Among participants, bilateral cataracts were present in 97% of subjects according to the medical record from the most recent eye examination (within 1 month of enrollment). In the right eye, 47% had nuclear sclerotic cataract, 7% had cortical cataract, 7% had posterior subcapsular cataract, and 39% had a combination of at least 2 types. The breakdown was similar in the left eye, with 51% nuclear sclerotic, 6% cortical, 5% posterior subcapsular, and 36% combination. Seventy-five percent of subjects with cataract had no additional ocular conditions other than refractive error; 9% had early nonexudative age-related maculopathy, 8% had primary open-angle glaucoma, 3% had diabetic retinopathy, 1% had a combination of 2 of these problems, and 4% had another ocular condition. Subjects who were cataract-free had to meet the same inclusion criteria as the subjects with cataract, except that they were required to be free of cataract and to have a best-corrected visual acuity of 20/25 in each eye, according to medical record review. No cataract-free subjects had secondary eye conditions other than refractive error.

Subjects were recruited through 10 ophthalmology practices and 2 optometry clinics in Birmingham, Ala. All persons meeting the inclusion criteria were contacted by their eye care specialist through a letter describing the study, followed by a telephone call from the study coordinator. Those who agreed to participate were scheduled for an appointment at the clinical research unit in the Department of Ophthalmology, University of Alabama at Birmingham(UAB). The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board for Human Use at UAB.

Information on key variables was obtained by telephone from those who chose not to participate in the ICOM project to facilitate generalizability of the findings. As described in detail previously,12"refusers" who had cataract were on average 3 years older, had slightly worse visual acuity, were more likely to have low driving exposure, and were less likely to have been involved in a crash in the previous 5 years compared with participants who had cataract. Refusers who were eligible for the study as noncataract subjects were more likely to have poor health than enrollees with cataract.

PROCEDURE

After the purpose of the study was explained, each subject was asked to sign a document of informed consent before enrolling. Demographic data and driving status during the prior 5 years were confirmed through interview. Three types of visual function were assessed: acuity, contrast sensitivity, and disability glare. Test examiners were masked to the crash histories of all subjects. All measurements were made while subjects wore the lens correction they typically used during the performance of everyday distance activities, including driving. Each eye was assessed separately. Distance acuity was measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letter chart and its standard protocol, and was expressed as log minimum angle resolvable.20,21 For each eye, visual acuity measurements were grouped into 4 categories: 20/25 or better, 20/25 to 20/30, 20/35 to 20/50, and worse than 20/50. These cut points were chosen because they were the approximate quartiles of the acuity distribution and included the practically significant cut point for driving licensure in many states (20/40 to 20/50). Contrast sensitivity was measured with the Pelli-Robson Contrast Sensitivity Chart and its standard protocol22,23 and was expressed as log contrast sensitivity; cut points for data analysis were also based on quartiles (better than 1.50, 1.50-1.34, 1.24-1.35, and 1.25 or worse). Disability glare was estimated with the Brightness Acuity Tester (BAT)24,25 as the subject viewed the Pelli-Robson Chart. Disability glare was defined as the Pelli-Robson score without the BAT minus the Pelli-Robson score with the BAT, and was dichotomized according to whether the subject's disability glare was 0.25 or greater, based on the 50% point of distribution.

Cognitive status was assessed because it is known to be associated with crash involvement in older drivers26,27 and, thus, could be a confounding factor. It was evaluated by the Mattis Organic Mental Syndrome Screening Examination,28 specifically designed to assess cognitive function in elderly people. This 20-minute test, described in detail in our previous articles,29,30 provides a composite score of mental status that reflects performance in 14 domains of cognitive functioning. Composite scores range from 0 to 28 with lower scores representing a higher degree of function; subjects with scores of 9 or higher were classified as cognitively impaired. An estimate of general health was provided through a questionnaire12 that asked about the presence vs absence of problems in 17 areas (eg, heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and stroke).

Crash data for the 5 years prior to enrollment were obtained from the Alabama Department of Public Safety, the state agency in charge of compiling such records. At-fault crash involvement was defined as participation in at least 1 crash in the previous 5 years in which the subject was deemed at least partially at fault. To determine whether a driver was at least partially at fault, 3 judges (C.O., B.T.S., and J.W.) independently evaluated the details surrounding each crash, which were described and diagrammed on each accident report provided by the state. Judges were unaware of which driver was the study subject in multiple vehicle collisions, and of drivers' visual and medical characteristics. The 3 judges agreed on at-fault determination in 83% of the crashes; in cases of disagreement, further discussion always led to consensus. Driving exposure information (estimated miles driven per week) was obtained from each subject by administering the Driving Habits Questionnaire.12 Subjects were classified into 2 categories according to whether they drove more or less than the median number of miles (150 miles) driven per week based on the distribution of all subjects. Although this was a self-report measure, prior studies indicate that older adults can provide valid estimates of driving exposure.31

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary aim of this article is to identify what type of vision impairment was mediating the elevated crash risk observed in the original sample12; thus, all major analyses were performed on the combined sample of subjects with cataract and those without cataract. As a preliminary step, we examined the distributions of visual function in both the cataract and cataract-free groups for the better and worse eyes separately to verify that the subjects with cataract had poorer visual function scores than those without cataract. The better vs worse eyes were defined in terms of visual acuity. Descriptive statistics were generated for demographics, cognitive function, general health, and driving exposure for at-fault crash-involved and not-at-fault crash-involved subjects, and were compared using χ2 and t tests as appropriate. For the relationship between visual function and at-fault crash involvement, unadjusted odds ratios(ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed separately for each measure of visual function (visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and disability glare). Preliminary analysis indicated that the visual function measures did not meet the assumptions of the logistic regression model (ie, the log odds are assumed to be a linear function of the risk factor). Therefore, visual function variables were entered as a series of categorical variables rather than continuous measures. Analyses were performed with adjustments for age, sex, race, cognitive status, general health, and driving exposure because these factors can affect crash risk.1 All inferential analyses were conducted using separate unconditional logistic regression models for the better and worse eyes. To determine the independent effect of visual function on at-fault crash involvement, measures of visual function (visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and disability glare) were evaluated simultaneously with additional adjustments for age, sex, race, cognitive status, general health, and driving exposure. These multiple visual function models were also evaluated separately for the better and worse eyes. Finally, the effect on crash risk of vision impairment in both eyes and in only 1 eye was evaluated using logistic regression.

Subjects incurred a total of 46 at-fault crashes during the 5 years prior to enrollment. Ten percent (39 of 377) of the sample subjects incurred at least 1 at-fault crash in the previous 5 years. Of these 39 subjects, 33 had 1, 5 had 2, and 1 had 3 at-fault crashes.

Table 1 lists the associations between at-fault crash involvement and demographic variables, cognitive status, general health, and driving exposure. Crash-involved drivers were more likely to be men (P = .004). There was a nonsignificant tendency for crash-involved drivers to have lower cognitive status (P = .07). Age, race, general health, and driving exposure were not significantly related to crash involvement.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Associations Between At-Fault Crash Involvement and Demographics, Cognitive Status, General Health, and Driving Exposure*28

As one would expect from our knowledge of the visual consequences of age-related cataract, those with cataract were much more likely to exhibit poorer visual function in both the better and worse eyes than were those free of cataract. Table 2 lists the distribution of visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and disability glare scores for subjects with cataract and those without. The prevalence of poor vision scores is higher in subjects with cataract than those free of cataract, consistent with what we have previously reported for this sample.12 Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity for both the better and worse eyes were correlated (Pearson r= −0.62 and −0.72, respectively), consistent with previous studies.28 In comparison, disability glare was more modestly correlated with visual acuity (r = 0.11 and 0.29, respectively) and contrast sensitivity (r = 0.07 and −0.22, respectively).

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Distribution of Visual Acuity, Contrast Sensitivity, and Disability Glare in the Cataract and No-Cataract Groups, for Worse Eye and Better Eye Separately*

As we have demonstrated previously for this sample,12 crash-involved drivers were approximately 2½ times more likely to have cataract than were crash-free drivers (OR = 2.46; 95% CI, 1.00-6.16). This association between cataract and crashing is the starting point for the present analyses. We were interested in determining what aspect of vision is mediating this increased crash risk. Table 3, Table 4, Table 5, and Table 6summarize results that address this question. Table 3 indicates the relationship between crash involvement and various types of visual function (visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and disability glare) in the better eye. Contrast sensitivity of 1.25 or less was the only variable crudely associated with crash involvement (OR = 2.65; 95% CI, 1.06-6.61). After adjusting for demographics, cognitive function, general health, and driving exposure, this relationship became stronger (OR= 4.97; 95% CI, 1.69-14.63). In addition, after these adjustments, visual acuity in the range of 20/35 to 20/50 was associated with crash involvement(OR = 3.17; 95% CI, 1.15-8.69). Although not statistically significant, there was also a possible relationship between visual acuity worse than 20/50 and crashing (OR = 3.12; 95% CI, 0.96-10.14).

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Relationship Between Visual Function in the Better Eye and At-Fault Crash Involvement*
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 4. Relationship Between Visual Function in the Worse Eye and At-Fault Crash Involvement*
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 5. Multiple Visual Function Models for Better Eye and Worse Eye, Examining Relationship Between Vision and At-Fault Crash Involvement*
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 6. Association Between At-Fault Crash Involvement and Impairment in Only 1 Eye and Both Eyes*

Table 4 lists the analogous crude and adjusted analyses for the worse eye, which generated results qualitatively similar to those for the better eye. Once again, the only crude association between visual function and crashing was contrast sensitivity of 1.25 or less(OR = 3.38; 95% CI, 1.21-9.47), which was strengthened by adjusting the association for demographics, cognitive function, general health, and driving exposure(OR = 7.06; 95% CI, 1.88-26.52). There were no significant associations, either crude or adjusted, between crashing and visual acuity or disability glare.

The independent contributions of visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and disability glare are displayed in Table 5 for the better and worse eyes separately. A contrast sensitivity score of 1.25 or less was the only independent predictor of crash involvement when adjusted for other aspects of visual function. The relationship was about 2 times stronger for the worse eye (OR = 7.86; 95% CI, 1.55-39.79) than for the better eye (OR = 3.78; 95% CI, 1.15-12.48). These general results remained even when subjects with secondary eye conditions (4.7% of the overall sample) were deleted from the analysis.

The question arises whether impairment in both eyes is required to generate an increased crash risk, or whether impairment in only 1 eye should also warrant concern. To address this question, impairment was defined for each visual function (Table 6), and then the effects of impairment in 1 eye and both eyes on crash risk were evaluated for each visual function. Contrast sensitivity impairment in both eyes was strongly associated with crash involvement (OR = 5.78; 95% CI, 1.87-17.86). Although the P value is 50% smaller, contrast sensitivity impairment in a single eye was also significantly related to crashing (OR= 2.70; 95% CI, 1.16-6.51). With respect to visual acuity and disability glare, impairment in both eyes or a single eye was not related to crash involvement.

As previously reported for this sample of older drivers,12 the presence of cataract is a risk factor for at-fault crash involvement (OR= 2.46; 95% CI, 1.00-6.16). To determine whether contrast sensitivity impairment is the mediator of this effect, the visual function models listed in Table 5 were recomputed with the addition of "cataract group/no cataract group" as a variable. The association between cataract group and crash involvement became nonsignificant (worse eye, OR= 1.26; 95% CI, 0.28-5.59; better eye, OR = 1.39; 95% CI, 0.42-4.62). This implies that the presence of contrast sensitivity in the model was primarily responsible for the change in the association between cataract and crash risk. Furthermore, after adding cataract status to the models in Table 4, the associations between contrast sensitivity and crash risk (worse eye, OR = 7.56; 95% CI, 1.47-38.99; better eye, OR = 3.32; 95% CI, 1.00-11.83) remained statistically significant.

Older drivers with serious impairment in contrast sensitivity due to cataract have an elevated risk of motor vehicle collision. In this study, drivers with a history of crash involvement were almost 6 times more likely to have serious contrast sensitivity impairment (Pelli-Robson score ≤1.25) in both eyes compared with those who were crash-free, adjusting for demographics, cognitive difficulties, and other forms of vision impairment. Our findings further indicate that contrast sensitivity impairment need be present in only 1 eye for collision risk to be elevated; crash-involved drivers were almost 3 times more likely to have a Pelli-Robson score of 1.25 or lower in only 1 eye compared with crash-free drivers. The results of this study are consistent with earlier studies reporting crude associations between contrast sensitivity deficits and crash involvement,28,32 traffic violations,33 and difficulties in driving performance by drivers with simulated cataract.34 However, these prior studies did not adjust for a variety of confounding factors known to affect crash risk. Our results go beyond previous studies in establishing that serious contrast sensitivity impairment in 1 or both eyes due to cataract is an independent threat to road safety.

Neither impaired visual acuity nor increased disability glare from cataract were independently associated with crash involvement in this study, and even their bivariate associations with crash involvement were generally nonsignificant. It is interesting to contemplate this finding; scrutiny suggests that safe driving may not require keen spatial resolution, and prior research supports this contention.3539 Although excellent visual acuity assists in reading distant road signs,4042 as with other aspects of mobility,4345 lower spatial frequencies appear to be more critical in navigating a vehicle. Severe deficits in acuity (20/100 or worse) may elevate crash risk, but it is common for older adults with cataract to undergo surgery and intraocular lens insertion before their visual impairment progresses to this stage. In our sample, which was recruited through eye care clinics, about 80% of those with cataract had visual acuity better than 20/100 in either eye. Another factor potentially underlying the lack of a relationship between visual acuity deficits and crash involvement is that those with severe acuity impairment may have already stopped driving, either voluntarily or because of state laws.

Glare problems are often discussed as a serious threat to the safety of older drivers.46,47 However, no studies have demonstrated that increased disability glare is independently associated with either crash involvement or self-reported difficulty in driving. The failure to confirm an association between road safety and disability glare in the present study and others28,38 may be due to several factors, including difficulty defining glare, trouble measuring its psychophysical effects, and a poor understanding of what people mean when they say they have "glare problems."25,48,49

Crash risk was higher in the analyses based on the worse eye compared with those of the better eye (Table 3, Table 4, Table 5. This appears to be inconsistent with a previous report indicating that the eye with better function is more predictive of patients' performance in visual tasks typical of daily life (mobility, face recognition, reading).50 Following the logic of previous studies, one would have expected the ORs for the association between crash involvement and contrast sensitivity in the worse eye to be weaker than for the better eye, but the result was dramatically reversed. These findings underscore the need for an improved understanding of the visual requirements of everyday tasks and the role of interocular differences in visually impaired persons.

Contrast sensitivity loss can be a consequence of other relatively common eye conditions in the older population, such as age-related maculopathy,51 glaucoma,52 and diabetic retinopathy.53 It remains to be determined whether contrast sensitivity impairment caused by these conditions also threatens driver safety, although the cause of the deficit would seem to be less important than the presence and severity of the impairment itself. Further work should address the relationship between driver safety and other common eye conditions that impair vision in older people. The present results call into question the heavy emphasis on acuity testing as the visual screening method at driver licensing sites, and add to the growing body of evidence that other types of visual processing deficits have greater influence on crash risk than does acuity impairment.36,38,39

A strength of this study is the measurement of, and adjustment for, other factors known to affect crash risk in older drivers, such as driving exposure, cognitive status, and general health. In addition, the role of specific visual function types was evaluated in terms of each function's contribution independent from other forms of vision impairment. Another strength is that the crash outcome variable was defined by state records; self-report of crash involvement is known to be unreliable in the older adult population.54,55 One limitation is the use of retrospective crash data because visual function was measured at the end of the period in which crashes were surveyed. Finally, this study did not address the differential effects of various types of age-related cataract on driver safety, an issue worthy of investigation because certain types of lens opacity (eg, posterior subcapsular) are reportedly more visually disabling than others.56

For most patients, cataract surgery has a dramatic effect in improving vision,10 and thus one wonders to what extent postsurgical improvement in contrast sensitivity, visual acuity, or other aspects of vision brings about a reduction in crash rate. As with many medical procedures, cataract surgery is closely scrutinized in terms of its cost vs benefit to the patient's quality of life and well-being. Driving mobility is an important aspect of quality of life in many societies. The patients in this sample are currently being followed prospectively to examine whether cataract surgery indeed lowers crash risk and, if so, to identify visual mechanisms underlying enhanced road safety.

Accepted for publication November 6, 2000.

This research was supported by grant P50 AG-11684 (Edward R. Roybal Center for Research in Applied Gerontology) from the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md, with supplemental funding from Research to Prevent Blindness Inc, New York, NY, and the EyeSight Foundation of Alabama Inc, Birmingham.

We thank the following whose clinics served as recruitment sources for this study: Michael Callahan, MD; Chris Kelly, MD; Sarah Hays, MD; C. James McCollum, MD; Theo Kirkland, MD; Harold Helms, MD, PhD; John Parker, MD; Lanning Kline, MD; Donald Turnbull, MD; Arol Augsburger, OD; Glenn Hammack, OD; Patti Fuhr, OD; and Joanne Jones.

Corresponding author and reprints: Cynthia Owsley, PhD, Department of Ophthalmology, Clinical Research Unit, School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 700 S 18th St, Suite 609, Birmingham, AL 35294-0009(e-mail: owsley@eyes.uab.edu).

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Conference on Research and Development Needed to Improve Safety and Mobility of Older Drivers.  Washington, DC US Dept of Transportation1989;
Transportation Research Board, Transportation in an Aging Society. 1 Washington, DC National Research Council1988;
McCoy  GFJohnson  RADuthie  RB Injury to the elderly in road traffic accidents. J Trauma. 1989;29494- 497
Link to Article
Barancik  JIChatterjee  BFGreene-Cadden  YCMichenzi  EM Motor vehicle trauma in northeastern Ohio: incidence and outcome by age, sex, road-use category. Am J Epidemiol. 1986;123846- 861
Evans  L Risk of fatality from physical trauma versus sex and age. J Trauma. 1988;28368- 378
Link to Article
Fingerhut  LAWarner  M Injury Chartbook: United States, 1996-97.  Hyattsville, Md National Center for Health Statistics1997;
Owsley  CMcGwin  GJ Vision impairment and driving. Surv Ophthalmol. 1999;43535- 550
Link to Article
Kahn  HALeibowitz  HMGanley  JP  et al.  The Framingham eye study: outline and major prevalence findings. Am J Epidemiol. 1977;10617- 41
Klein  BEKKlein  RLinton  KLP Prevalence of age-related lens opacities in a population: the Beaver Dam Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 1992;99546- 552
Link to Article
Rubin  GSAdamsons  IAStark  WJ Comparison of acuity, contrast sensitivity, and disability glare before and after cataract surgery. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993;11156- 61
Link to Article
Cataract Mangagement Guideline Panel, Cataract in Adults: Management of Functional Impairment: Clinic Practice Guideline.  Rockville, Md Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, US Dept of Health and Human Services1993;
Owsley  CStalvey  BWells  JSloane  ME Older drivers and cataract: driving habits and crash risk. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1999;54M203- M211
Link to Article
McGwin  GChapman  VOwsley  C Visual risk factors for driving difficulty among older drivers. Accid Anal Prev. 2000;32735- 744
Link to Article
Mangione  CMPhillips  RSSeddon  JM  et al.  Development of the Activities of Daily Vision Scale: a measure of visual functional status. Med Care. 1992;301111- 1126
Link to Article
Ball  KOwsley  CStalvey  BRoenker  DLGraves  M Driving avoidance and functional impairment in older drivers. Accid Anal Prev. 1998;30313- 322
Link to Article
Marottoli  RAMendes de Leon  CFGlass  TA  et al.  Driving cessation and increased depressive symptoms: prospective evidence from the New Haven EPESE. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997;45202- 206
Applegate  WBMiller  STElam  JTFreeman  JMWood  TOGettlefinger  TC Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation on vision and physical function in elderly patients. JAMA. 1987;2571064- 1066
Link to Article
Mangione  CMPhillips  RSLawrence  MGSeddon  JMOrav  EJGoldman  L Improved visual function and attenuation of declines in health-related quality of life after cataract extraction. Arch Ophthalmol. 1994;1121419- 1425
Link to Article
Monestam  EWachtmeister  L Impact of cataract surgery on car driving: a population based study in Sweden. Br J Ophthalmol. 1997;8116- 22
Link to Article
Ferris  FLKassoff  ABresnick  GHBailey  I New visual acuity charts for clinical research. Am J Ophthalmol. 1982;9491- 96
Ferris  FLSperduto  RD Standardized illumination for visual acuity testing in clinical research. Am J Ophthalmol. 1982;9497- 98
Pelli  DGRobson  JGWilkins  AJ The design of a new letter chart for measuring contrast sensitivity. Clin Vis Sci. 1988;2187- 199
Elliott  DBSanderson  KConkey  A The reliability of the Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity chart. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1990;1021- 24
Link to Article
Holladay  JTPrager  TCTrujillo  JRuiz  RS Brightness acuity test and outdoor visual acuity in cataract patients. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1987;1367- 69
Link to Article
Elliott  DBBullimore  MA Assessing the reliability, discriminative ability, and validity of disability glare tests. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;34108- 119
Cooper  PJTallman  KTuokko  HBeattie  BL Vehicle crash involvement and cognitive deficit in older drivers. J Safety Res. 1993;249- 17
Link to Article
Marottoli  RACooney  LM  JrWagner  DRDoucette  JTinetti  ME Predictors of automobile crashes and moving violations among elderly drivers. Ann Intern Med. 1994;121842- 846
Link to Article
Mattis  S Mental status examination for organic mental syndrome in the elderly patient. Bella  LKarasu  TBedsGeriatric Psychiatry. 2nd New York, NY Oxford University Press1976;77- 121
Ball  KOwsley  CSloane  MERoenker  DLBruni  JR Visual attention problems as a predictor of vehicle crashes in older drivers. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;343110- 3123
Owsley  CBall  KSloane  MERoenker  DLBruni  JR Visual/cognitive correlates of vehicle accidents in older drivers. Psychol Aging. 1991;6403- 415
Link to Article
Murakami  EWagner  DP Comparison Between Computer-Assisted Self-interviewing Using GPS With Retrospective Trip Reporting Using Telephone Interviews.  Washington, DC Federal Highway Administration, US Dept of Transportation1997;
Owsley  C Vision and driving in the elderly. Optom Vis Sci. 1994;71727- 735
Link to Article
Marottoli  RARichardson  EDStowe  MH  et al.  Development of a test battery to identify older drivers at risk for self-reported adverse driving events. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1998;46562- 568
Wood  JMDique  TTroutbeck  R The effect of artificial visual impairment on functional visual fields and driving performance. Clin Vis Sci. 1993;8563- 575
Hills  BLBurg  A A Reanalysis of California Driver Vision Data: General Findings.  Crowthorn, England Transport and Road Research Laboratory1977;
Decina  LEStaplin  L Retrospective evaluation of alternative vision screening criteria for older and younger drivers. Accid Anal Prev. 1993;25267- 275
Link to Article
McCloskey  LWKoepsell  TDWolf  MEBuchner  DM Motor vehicle collision injuries and sensory impairments of older drivers. Age Ageing. 1994;23267- 273
Link to Article
Owsley  CBall  KMcGwin  G  Jr  et al.  Visual processing impairment and risk of motor vehicle crash among older adults. JAMA. 1998;2791083- 1088
Link to Article
Rubin  GSKeyl  PMMunoz  B  et al.  The association of vision, cognition, and attention with crashes in an older American population: SEE Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999;40(suppl)S387
Wood  JM How do visual status and age impact on driving performance as measured on a closed circuit driving track? Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1998;1934- 40
Link to Article
Higgins  KEWood  JTait  A Vision and driving: selective effect of optical blur on different driving tasks. Hum Factors. 1998;41224- 232
Link to Article
Kline  DWKline  TJBFozard  JLKosnik  WSchieber  FSekuler  R Vision, aging, and driving: the problems of older drivers. J Gerontol. 1992;47P27- P34
Link to Article
Marron  JABailey  IL Visual factors and orientation-mobility performance. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1982;59413- 426
Link to Article
Rubin  GSRoche  KBPrasada-Rao  PFried  LP Visual impairment and disability in older adults. Optom Vis Sci. 1994;71750- 760
Link to Article
Kuyk  TElliott  JLFuhr  PS Visual correlates of obstacle avoidance in adults with low vision. Optom Vis Sci. 1998;75174- 182
Link to Article
Wolbarsht  ML Tests for glare sensitivity and peripheral vision in driver applicants. J Safety Res. 1977;9128- 139
Pulling  NHWolf  ESturgis  SPVaillancourt  DRDolliver  JJ Headlight glare resistance and driver age. Hum Factors. 1980;22103- 112
Van den Berg  TJTP Importance of pathological intraocular light scatter for visual disability. Doc Ophthalmol. 1986;61327- 333
Link to Article
Vos  JJ Disability glare: a state of the art report. CIE Journal. 1984;339- 53
Rubin  GSMuñoz  BBandeen-Roche  KWest  SKfor the SEE Project Team, Monocular versus binocular visual acuity as measures of vision impairment and predictors of visual disability. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;413327- 3334
Sjostrand  JFrisen  L Contrast sensitivity in macular disease: a preliminary report. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh). 1977;55507- 514
Link to Article
Atkin  ABodis-Wollner  IWolkstein  MMoss  APodos  SM Abnormalities of central contrast sensitivity in glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 1979;88205- 211
Sokol  SMoskowitz  ASkarf  BEvans  RMolitch  MSenior  B Contrast sensitivity in diabetics with and without background retinopathy. Arch Ophthalmol. 1985;10351- 54
Link to Article
McGwin  G  JrOwsley  CBall  K Identifying crash involvement among older drivers: agreement between self-report and state records. Accid Anal Prev. 1998;30781- 791
Link to Article
Ball  KOwsley  C Identifying correlates of accident involvement for the older driver. Hum Factors. 1991;33583- 595
Elliott  DBGilchrist  JWhitaker  D Contrast sensitivity and glare sensitivity changes with three types of cataract morphology: are these techniques necessary in a clinical evaluation of cataract? Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1989;925- 30
Link to Article

Figures

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Associations Between At-Fault Crash Involvement and Demographics, Cognitive Status, General Health, and Driving Exposure*28
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Distribution of Visual Acuity, Contrast Sensitivity, and Disability Glare in the Cataract and No-Cataract Groups, for Worse Eye and Better Eye Separately*
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Relationship Between Visual Function in the Better Eye and At-Fault Crash Involvement*
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 4. Relationship Between Visual Function in the Worse Eye and At-Fault Crash Involvement*
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 5. Multiple Visual Function Models for Better Eye and Worse Eye, Examining Relationship Between Vision and At-Fault Crash Involvement*
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 6. Association Between At-Fault Crash Involvement and Impairment in Only 1 Eye and Both Eyes*

References

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Conference on Research and Development Needed to Improve Safety and Mobility of Older Drivers.  Washington, DC US Dept of Transportation1989;
Transportation Research Board, Transportation in an Aging Society. 1 Washington, DC National Research Council1988;
McCoy  GFJohnson  RADuthie  RB Injury to the elderly in road traffic accidents. J Trauma. 1989;29494- 497
Link to Article
Barancik  JIChatterjee  BFGreene-Cadden  YCMichenzi  EM Motor vehicle trauma in northeastern Ohio: incidence and outcome by age, sex, road-use category. Am J Epidemiol. 1986;123846- 861
Evans  L Risk of fatality from physical trauma versus sex and age. J Trauma. 1988;28368- 378
Link to Article
Fingerhut  LAWarner  M Injury Chartbook: United States, 1996-97.  Hyattsville, Md National Center for Health Statistics1997;
Owsley  CMcGwin  GJ Vision impairment and driving. Surv Ophthalmol. 1999;43535- 550
Link to Article
Kahn  HALeibowitz  HMGanley  JP  et al.  The Framingham eye study: outline and major prevalence findings. Am J Epidemiol. 1977;10617- 41
Klein  BEKKlein  RLinton  KLP Prevalence of age-related lens opacities in a population: the Beaver Dam Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 1992;99546- 552
Link to Article
Rubin  GSAdamsons  IAStark  WJ Comparison of acuity, contrast sensitivity, and disability glare before and after cataract surgery. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993;11156- 61
Link to Article
Cataract Mangagement Guideline Panel, Cataract in Adults: Management of Functional Impairment: Clinic Practice Guideline.  Rockville, Md Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, US Dept of Health and Human Services1993;
Owsley  CStalvey  BWells  JSloane  ME Older drivers and cataract: driving habits and crash risk. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1999;54M203- M211
Link to Article
McGwin  GChapman  VOwsley  C Visual risk factors for driving difficulty among older drivers. Accid Anal Prev. 2000;32735- 744
Link to Article
Mangione  CMPhillips  RSSeddon  JM  et al.  Development of the Activities of Daily Vision Scale: a measure of visual functional status. Med Care. 1992;301111- 1126
Link to Article
Ball  KOwsley  CStalvey  BRoenker  DLGraves  M Driving avoidance and functional impairment in older drivers. Accid Anal Prev. 1998;30313- 322
Link to Article
Marottoli  RAMendes de Leon  CFGlass  TA  et al.  Driving cessation and increased depressive symptoms: prospective evidence from the New Haven EPESE. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997;45202- 206
Applegate  WBMiller  STElam  JTFreeman  JMWood  TOGettlefinger  TC Impact of cataract surgery with lens implantation on vision and physical function in elderly patients. JAMA. 1987;2571064- 1066
Link to Article
Mangione  CMPhillips  RSLawrence  MGSeddon  JMOrav  EJGoldman  L Improved visual function and attenuation of declines in health-related quality of life after cataract extraction. Arch Ophthalmol. 1994;1121419- 1425
Link to Article
Monestam  EWachtmeister  L Impact of cataract surgery on car driving: a population based study in Sweden. Br J Ophthalmol. 1997;8116- 22
Link to Article
Ferris  FLKassoff  ABresnick  GHBailey  I New visual acuity charts for clinical research. Am J Ophthalmol. 1982;9491- 96
Ferris  FLSperduto  RD Standardized illumination for visual acuity testing in clinical research. Am J Ophthalmol. 1982;9497- 98
Pelli  DGRobson  JGWilkins  AJ The design of a new letter chart for measuring contrast sensitivity. Clin Vis Sci. 1988;2187- 199
Elliott  DBSanderson  KConkey  A The reliability of the Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity chart. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1990;1021- 24
Link to Article
Holladay  JTPrager  TCTrujillo  JRuiz  RS Brightness acuity test and outdoor visual acuity in cataract patients. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1987;1367- 69
Link to Article
Elliott  DBBullimore  MA Assessing the reliability, discriminative ability, and validity of disability glare tests. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;34108- 119
Cooper  PJTallman  KTuokko  HBeattie  BL Vehicle crash involvement and cognitive deficit in older drivers. J Safety Res. 1993;249- 17
Link to Article
Marottoli  RACooney  LM  JrWagner  DRDoucette  JTinetti  ME Predictors of automobile crashes and moving violations among elderly drivers. Ann Intern Med. 1994;121842- 846
Link to Article
Mattis  S Mental status examination for organic mental syndrome in the elderly patient. Bella  LKarasu  TBedsGeriatric Psychiatry. 2nd New York, NY Oxford University Press1976;77- 121
Ball  KOwsley  CSloane  MERoenker  DLBruni  JR Visual attention problems as a predictor of vehicle crashes in older drivers. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;343110- 3123
Owsley  CBall  KSloane  MERoenker  DLBruni  JR Visual/cognitive correlates of vehicle accidents in older drivers. Psychol Aging. 1991;6403- 415
Link to Article
Murakami  EWagner  DP Comparison Between Computer-Assisted Self-interviewing Using GPS With Retrospective Trip Reporting Using Telephone Interviews.  Washington, DC Federal Highway Administration, US Dept of Transportation1997;
Owsley  C Vision and driving in the elderly. Optom Vis Sci. 1994;71727- 735
Link to Article
Marottoli  RARichardson  EDStowe  MH  et al.  Development of a test battery to identify older drivers at risk for self-reported adverse driving events. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1998;46562- 568
Wood  JMDique  TTroutbeck  R The effect of artificial visual impairment on functional visual fields and driving performance. Clin Vis Sci. 1993;8563- 575
Hills  BLBurg  A A Reanalysis of California Driver Vision Data: General Findings.  Crowthorn, England Transport and Road Research Laboratory1977;
Decina  LEStaplin  L Retrospective evaluation of alternative vision screening criteria for older and younger drivers. Accid Anal Prev. 1993;25267- 275
Link to Article
McCloskey  LWKoepsell  TDWolf  MEBuchner  DM Motor vehicle collision injuries and sensory impairments of older drivers. Age Ageing. 1994;23267- 273
Link to Article
Owsley  CBall  KMcGwin  G  Jr  et al.  Visual processing impairment and risk of motor vehicle crash among older adults. JAMA. 1998;2791083- 1088
Link to Article
Rubin  GSKeyl  PMMunoz  B  et al.  The association of vision, cognition, and attention with crashes in an older American population: SEE Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999;40(suppl)S387
Wood  JM How do visual status and age impact on driving performance as measured on a closed circuit driving track? Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1998;1934- 40
Link to Article
Higgins  KEWood  JTait  A Vision and driving: selective effect of optical blur on different driving tasks. Hum Factors. 1998;41224- 232
Link to Article
Kline  DWKline  TJBFozard  JLKosnik  WSchieber  FSekuler  R Vision, aging, and driving: the problems of older drivers. J Gerontol. 1992;47P27- P34
Link to Article
Marron  JABailey  IL Visual factors and orientation-mobility performance. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1982;59413- 426
Link to Article
Rubin  GSRoche  KBPrasada-Rao  PFried  LP Visual impairment and disability in older adults. Optom Vis Sci. 1994;71750- 760
Link to Article
Kuyk  TElliott  JLFuhr  PS Visual correlates of obstacle avoidance in adults with low vision. Optom Vis Sci. 1998;75174- 182
Link to Article
Wolbarsht  ML Tests for glare sensitivity and peripheral vision in driver applicants. J Safety Res. 1977;9128- 139
Pulling  NHWolf  ESturgis  SPVaillancourt  DRDolliver  JJ Headlight glare resistance and driver age. Hum Factors. 1980;22103- 112
Van den Berg  TJTP Importance of pathological intraocular light scatter for visual disability. Doc Ophthalmol. 1986;61327- 333
Link to Article
Vos  JJ Disability glare: a state of the art report. CIE Journal. 1984;339- 53
Rubin  GSMuñoz  BBandeen-Roche  KWest  SKfor the SEE Project Team, Monocular versus binocular visual acuity as measures of vision impairment and predictors of visual disability. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;413327- 3334
Sjostrand  JFrisen  L Contrast sensitivity in macular disease: a preliminary report. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh). 1977;55507- 514
Link to Article
Atkin  ABodis-Wollner  IWolkstein  MMoss  APodos  SM Abnormalities of central contrast sensitivity in glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 1979;88205- 211
Sokol  SMoskowitz  ASkarf  BEvans  RMolitch  MSenior  B Contrast sensitivity in diabetics with and without background retinopathy. Arch Ophthalmol. 1985;10351- 54
Link to Article
McGwin  G  JrOwsley  CBall  K Identifying crash involvement among older drivers: agreement between self-report and state records. Accid Anal Prev. 1998;30781- 791
Link to Article
Ball  KOwsley  C Identifying correlates of accident involvement for the older driver. Hum Factors. 1991;33583- 595
Elliott  DBGilchrist  JWhitaker  D Contrast sensitivity and glare sensitivity changes with three types of cataract morphology: are these techniques necessary in a clinical evaluation of cataract? Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1989;925- 30
Link to Article

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 134

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
PubMed Articles