The efficacy of an educational intervention in promoting self-regulation among high-risk older drivers
Introduction
Injuries and deaths from vehicle crashes have become a public health concern, particularly among older drivers who as a group have a higher crash rate per mile driven and who are more likely to die or become seriously disabled after a crash as compared to other age groups (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1997). Like young and middle-aged adults, almost 90% of older adults rely on the private automobile for the majority of their transportation needs (Transportation Research Board, 1988, Martinez, 1995), and thus, driving cessation can hamper the personal mobility of this population. The increased crash risk among older drivers is linked to visual impairment (Owsley, 2002). Many older drivers with visual problems meet the legal requirements for licensing despite having impairments that elevate crash risk. Therefore, it is important to develop interventions for older drivers who maintain driving privileges while coping with visual limitations that hamper driving performance.
Efforts to intervene on older drivers through a primary crash prevention approach deserve consideration. Educational programs have been developed to promote driver safety among the elderly (Beno, 1981), addressing topics such as common age-related functional changes that impact driving (AAA, 1998, American Association of Retired Persons, 1997, Janke, 1994, National Safety Council, 1997). These programs are tailored for group administration or presented in a booklet or video. Two educational programs for older drivers have been evaluated (McKnight et al., 1982, Janke, 1994). Although these programs had a positive impact in terms of gains in knowledge of safety facts, it remains to be determined whether there were also changes in driver attitudes and self-perceptions. The field of health education indicates that changes in attitudes and self-perceptions play a critical role in generating intentions to change behavior and are, thus, prerequisites to changing behavior itself (Ajzen and Madden, 1986, Pender and Pender, 1986, Strain, 1991). Thus, it is interesting to consider if visually-impaired older drivers were provided with information to increase self-awareness about their risks for adverse driving outcomes, would they be more likely to exhibit safety-oriented behaviors, as compared to those who are not provided with such information?
‘Knowledge enhances your safety’ (KEYS) is a randomized intervention study to evaluate an educational program that promotes safe driving practices among visually-impaired older drivers. KEYS has two primary outcome measures assessed during the 2 years following randomization: self-reported driver behaviors (e.g. avoidance of challenging driving situations, exposure), and state-recorded crash involvement in the ensuing years. The focus is on older drivers at “high-risk” for crash involvement, where high-risk is operationally defined as older drivers with visual processing impairment, high driving exposure, and a crash on the state record in the year prior to enrollment. These are known to be characteristics that elevate the risk of crash involvement in older drivers (Owsley, 2002). KEYS has an experimental design with random assignment to either an intervention group (those who receive the educational curriculum) or a non-intervention group. Here, we report the results of the first 6 months follow-up with respect to self-reported attitudes about vision impairment and driving and self-reported driving behaviors. Analyses focus on the following questions: does an individualized, one-on-one educational curriculum presented to high-risk older drivers: (1) change their self-perceptions about the quality of vision, (2) change their general attitudes toward driver safety, and (3) increase their avoidance of challenging driving situations through self-regulation and reduced driving exposure.
Section snippets
Subjects
The source population consisted of older drivers in the Birmingham, Alabama area as provided by records of the Alabama Department of Public Safety. Potential participants were contacted by a letter describing the study, followed by a phone call to determine if they met the inclusion criteria for age, driving status, and driving exposure (see the following sections). If so, they were invited to visit the Clinical Research Unit in the Department of Ophthalmology at the University of Alabama at
Sample characteristics
Participants (N=365) had a mean age of 74 years (60–91 years; S.D.=6) with 69% male and 31% female, and 23% African–American and 77% white of non-Hispanic origin. The high percentage of males in this sample is consistent with the population of crash-involved drivers from which they were recruited where males are more likely to have a history of crash involvement than females (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1997). Eighteen percent of our participants had both visual acuity
Discussion
The purpose of this paper was to evaluate the efficacy of an educational curriculum designed to increase self-awareness about driving and vision and to promote self-regulatory behaviors among older drivers at high-risk for crashing because of vision impairment, previous recent crash involvement, and high driving exposure. The first question addressed was whether an educational curriculum could improve older drivers, awareness that their vision was impaired (when in fact it was) and that these
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by General Motors Corporation pursuant to an agreement between General Motors and the United States Department of Transportation.
References (24)
- et al.
Prediction of goal-directed behavior: attitudes, intentions, and perceived behavioral control
J. Exp. Social Psychol.
(1986) - et al.
New visual acuity charts for clinical research
Am. J. Ophthalmol.
(1982) - et al.
Mini-Mental State: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician
J. Psychiatr. Res.
(1975) - AAA, 1998. Safe Driving for Mature Operators. Driver Improvement Program,...
- AARP, American Association of Retired Persons, 1997. AARP 55 Alive/Mature Driving Program: Program Description....
- Ball, K., Roenker, D.L., Bruni, J.R., 1990. Developmental changes in attention and visual search throughout adulthood....
Driving education programs for the aged: the state of the art
Educ. Gerontol.: An Int. Quart.
(1981)- Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, 2001. What works and does not work to improve highway safety? Status Rep. 36...
Mature driver improvement program in California
Transport. Res. Record
(1994)- et al.
Psychometric properties of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ)
Arch. Ophthalmol.
(1998)
Older drivers and physicians
J. Am. Med. Assoc.
Cited by (145)
Modeling of older adults’ driving exposure and avoidance using objective driving data in a naturalistic driving study
2022, Accident Analysis and PreventionEffect of educational intervention addressing inaccurate self-assessment of driving performance in older Japanese adults
2021, Accident Analysis and PreventionA systematic review and meta-analysis of older driver interventions
2021, Accident Analysis and PreventionCitation Excerpt :Specifically, four examined driving mobility (Coxon et al., 2017; Edwards et al., 2009b; Jones et al., 2011; Ross et al., 2016); two examined driving cessation (Edwards et al., 2009a; Ross et al., 2017); two examined driving knowledge and safety behaviors (e.g., “How often do you wear a seat belt?”) ( Jones et al., 2012; Uribe-Leitz et al., 2015); one examined self-regulatory driving practices and avoidance (Owsley et al., 2003); and one examined hazard perception response time (Horswill et al., 2015) and were thus excluded from analyses. Nineteen of the 70 RCTs published in peer-reviewed journals considered older drivers as 50 years of age and older.
Comparison between elderly and young drivers’ performances on a driving simulator and self-assessment of their driving attitudes and mastery
2020, Accident Analysis and PreventionOlder driver training programs: A systematic review of evidence aimed at improving behind-the-wheel performance
2019, Journal of Safety ResearchCitation Excerpt :Table 2 details the components of each intervention by treatment arm. Theoretical underpinnings or models that informed their respective interventions were outlined in 12 of the 33 studies (Anstey et al., 2018; Caragata et al., 2009; Casutt et al., 2014; Coxon et al., 2017; Jones et al., 2011, 2012; Nasvadi & Vavrik, 2007; Owsley et al., 2004, 2003; Romoser & Fisher, 2009; Tuokko et al., 2015). Theories and models included: the Health Belief Model (HBM) (Rosenstock, 1974), Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) (Bandura, 1977, 1986), the Precaution Adoption Process Model (PAPM) (Weinstein, Sandman, & Blalock, 2008), the Selection, Optimization and Compensation (SOC) Model (Baltes & Baltes, 1990), Self-Regulation Theory (SRT) (Kanfer, 1999), the Transtheoretical Model of Behaviour Change (TTM) (Prochaska & DiClemente, 1982), and the Goals for Driver Education (GDE) Framework (Hatakka et al., 2002).