AIMS: To identify visual and medical risk factors for motor vehicle collisions (MVCs). METHODS: Data from four cohorts of older drivers from three states were pooled (n = 3158). Health information was collected at baseline, and MVC data were obtained prospectively. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate rate ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs for associations between medical characteristics and MVCs. RESULTS: A total of 363 MVCs were observed during the study period (1990-1997), of which 145 were at fault, and 62 were injurious. Falls and impaired useful field of view (UFOV) were positively associated with overall MVCs. At-fault MVCs were also positively associated with falls and UFOV impairment, and inversely with cancer. Injurious MVCs were positively associated with arthritis and neurological disease, and inversely with hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: These findings show similarities and differences across the risk factors for all, at-fault and injurious MVCs, and point to the need for verification and possible interventions.
AIMS: To identify visual and medical risk factors for motor vehicle collisions (MVCs). METHODS: Data from four cohorts of older drivers from three states were pooled (n = 3158). Health information was collected at baseline, and MVC data were obtained prospectively. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate rate ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs for associations between medical characteristics and MVCs. RESULTS: A total of 363 MVCs were observed during the study period (1990-1997), of which 145 were at fault, and 62 were injurious. Falls and impaired useful field of view (UFOV) were positively associated with overall MVCs. At-fault MVCs were also positively associated with falls and UFOV impairment, and inversely with cancer. Injurious MVCs were positively associated with arthritis and neurological disease, and inversely with hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: These findings show similarities and differences across the risk factors for all, at-fault and injurious MVCs, and point to the need for verification and possible interventions.
Authors: Karen L Margolis; Roxanne Pieper Kerani; Paul McGovern; Thomas Songer; Jane A Cauley; Kristine E Ensrud Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: T D Koepsell; M E Wolf; L McCloskey; D M Buchner; D Louie; E H Wagner; R S Thompson Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 1994-07 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: G A Colditz; P Martin; M J Stampfer; W C Willett; L Sampson; B Rosner; C H Hennekens; F E Speizer Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 1986-05 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Kenneth A Scott; Eli Rogers; Marian E Betz; Lilian Hoffecker; Guohua Li; Carolyn DiGuiseppi Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2017-09-05 Impact factor: 5.562