Citation

Bouillon L, Mazer B, Gelinas I. Am. J. Occup. Ther. 2006; 60(4): 420-427.

Affiliation

Jewish Rehabilitation Hospital, 3205 Place Alton Goldbloom, Chomedey, Laval, Quebec, Canada H7V1R2.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2006, American Occupational Therapy Association)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

16915872

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study seeks to (a) compare Cognitive Behavioral Driver's Inventory (CBDI) scores for clients who passed and failed a driving evaluation and for diagnostic groups (left cerebrovascular accident [CVA], right CVA, traumatic brain injury [TBI], and cognitive decline); (b) determine sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the CBDI; (c) compare validity of the CBDI with other tools; and (d) identify factors associated with outcome. PARTICIPANTS: This historical cohort study included clients with neurological conditions who completed a driving evaluation. MEASURES: CBDI, Motor-Free Visual Perception Test (MVPT), Bells test, and driving results were extracted from the charts. RESULTS: Mean CBDI (p < 0.0001) and MVPT (p < 0.0001) scores were significantly worse for those failing compared to passing the driving evaluation. Sensitivity of the CBDI was 62%, specificity was 81%, positive predictive values were 73%, and negative predictive values were 71%. Results varied according to diagnostic group. CONCLUSIONS: The CBDI is not sufficiently predictive of outcome to replace a driving evaluation, and is predictive only for clients with R-CVA and TBI. Evaluation of driving should vary according to diagnosis.

Language: en