OBJECTIVES: To test the effects of cognitive training on subsequent motor vehicle collision (MVC) involvement of older drivers. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled, multisite, single-blind clinical trial. SETTING:Community-dwelling seniors at four U.S. sites: Birmingham, Alabama; Baltimore, Maryland; Indianapolis, Indiana; and State College, Pennsylvania. PARTICIPANTS: Nine hundred eight older drivers (mean age 73.1; 18.6% African American) who were randomized to one of three cognitive interventions or a control condition. INTERVENTIONS: Up to 10 sessions of cognitive training for memory, reasoning, or speed of processing. MEASUREMENTS: State-recorded MVC involvement up to 6 years after study enrollment. RESULTS:Speed-of-processing and reasoning training resulted in lower rates of at-fault collision involvement over the subsequent approximately 6-year period than controls. After adjusting for age, sex, race, education, mental status, health, vision, depressive symptoms, and testing site, participants randomized to the speed-of-processing and reasoning interventions had an approximately 50% lower rate (per person-mile) of at-fault MVCs than the control group (rate ratio (RR) = 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.34-0.96 for speed of processing), and (RR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.27-0.92 for reasoning). There was no significant difference observed for the memory group. CONCLUSION:Cognitive speed-of-processing and reasoning training resulted in a lower at-fault MVC rate in older drivers than in controls. Considering the importance of driving mobility, the costs of crashes, and the benefits of cognitive training, these interventions have great potential to sustain independence and quality of life of older adults. More research is needed to understand the effects of different types and quantities of training.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To test the effects of cognitive training on subsequent motor vehicle collision (MVC) involvement of older drivers. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled, multisite, single-blind clinical trial. SETTING: Community-dwelling seniors at four U.S. sites: Birmingham, Alabama; Baltimore, Maryland; Indianapolis, Indiana; and State College, Pennsylvania. PARTICIPANTS: Nine hundred eight older drivers (mean age 73.1; 18.6% African American) who were randomized to one of three cognitive interventions or a control condition. INTERVENTIONS: Up to 10 sessions of cognitive training for memory, reasoning, or speed of processing. MEASUREMENTS: State-recorded MVC involvement up to 6 years after study enrollment. RESULTS: Speed-of-processing and reasoning training resulted in lower rates of at-fault collision involvement over the subsequent approximately 6-year period than controls. After adjusting for age, sex, race, education, mental status, health, vision, depressive symptoms, and testing site, participants randomized to the speed-of-processing and reasoning interventions had an approximately 50% lower rate (per person-mile) of at-fault MVCs than the control group (rate ratio (RR) = 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.34-0.96 for speed of processing), and (RR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.27-0.92 for reasoning). There was no significant difference observed for the memory group. CONCLUSION: Cognitive speed-of-processing and reasoning training resulted in a lower at-fault MVC rate in older drivers than in controls. Considering the importance of driving mobility, the costs of crashes, and the benefits of cognitive training, these interventions have great potential to sustain independence and quality of life of older adults. More research is needed to understand the effects of different types and quantities of training.
Authors: Karlene Ball; Daniel B Berch; Karin F Helmers; Jared B Jobe; Mary D Leveck; Michael Marsiske; John N Morris; George W Rebok; David M Smith; Sharon L Tennstedt; Frederick W Unverzagt; Sherry L Willis Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-11-13 Impact factor: 56.272
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: William A Satariano; Jack M Guralnik; Richard J Jackson; Richard A Marottoli; Elizabeth A Phelan; Thomas R Prohaska Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2012-06-14 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Lesley A Ross; Jerri D Edwards; Melissa L O'Connor; Karlene K Ball; Virginia G Wadley; David E Vance Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2015-04-15 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: Adam J Woods; Ronald Cohen; Michael Marsiske; Gene E Alexander; Sara J Czaja; Samuel Wu Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2017-12-05 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Susan J Pressler; Alison Martineau; Judith Grossi; Bruno Giordani; Todd M Koelling; David L Ronis; Penny L Riley; Cheng-Chen Chou; Barbara J Sullivan; Dean G Smith Journal: Heart Lung Date: 2013-07-01 Impact factor: 2.210
Authors: Lesley A Ross; Christina E Webb; Christine Whitaker; Jarrod M Hicks; Erica L Schmidt; Shaadee Samimy; Nancy A Dennis; Kristina M Visscher Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2019-09-15 Impact factor: 4.077