Donna C Bird1, Katherine Freund1, Richard H Fortinsky2, Loren Staplin3, Bethany A West4, Gwen Bergen4, Jonathan Downs4,5. 1. a ITNAmerica , Westbrook , Maine. 2. b University of Connecticut School of Medicine , Farmington , Connecticut. 3. c TransAnalytics, LLC , Quakertown , Pennsylvania. 4. d Division of Unintentional Injury Prevention, CDC , Atlanta , Georgia. 5. e Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, ORAU , Oak Ridge , Tennessee.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study examined a multicommunity alternative transportation program available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for any purpose, offering door-through-door service in private automobiles to members who either do not drive or are transitioning away from driving. Specific aims were to describe the characteristics of members by driving status and ride service usage of these members. METHODS: Data came from administrative records maintained by a nonprofit ride service program and include 2,661 individuals aged 65+ residing in 14 states who joined the program between April 1, 2010, and November 8, 2013. Latent class analysis was used to group current drivers into 3 classes of driving status of low, medium, and high self-regulation, based on their self-reported avoidance of certain driving situations and weekly driving frequency. Demographics and ride service use rate for rides taken through March 31, 2014, by type of ride (e.g., medical, social, etc.) were calculated for nondrivers and drivers in each driving status class. RESULTS: The majority of ride service users were female (77%) and aged 65-74 years (82%). The primary method of getting around when enrolling for the transportation service was by riding with a friend or family member (60%). Among the 67,883 rides given, nondrivers took the majority (69%) of rides. Medical rides were the most common, accounting for 40% of all rides. CONCLUSIONS: Reported ride usage suggests that older adults are willing to use such ride services for a variety of trips when these services are not limited to specific types (e.g., medical). Further research can help tailor strategies to encourage both nondrivers and drivers to make better use of alternative transportation that meets the special needs of older people.
OBJECTIVES: This study examined a multicommunity alternative transportation program available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for any purpose, offering door-through-door service in private automobiles to members who either do not drive or are transitioning away from driving. Specific aims were to describe the characteristics of members by driving status and ride service usage of these members. METHODS: Data came from administrative records maintained by a nonprofit ride service program and include 2,661 individuals aged 65+ residing in 14 states who joined the program between April 1, 2010, and November 8, 2013. Latent class analysis was used to group current drivers into 3 classes of driving status of low, medium, and high self-regulation, based on their self-reported avoidance of certain driving situations and weekly driving frequency. Demographics and ride service use rate for rides taken through March 31, 2014, by type of ride (e.g., medical, social, etc.) were calculated for nondrivers and drivers in each driving status class. RESULTS: The majority of ride service users were female (77%) and aged 65-74 years (82%). The primary method of getting around when enrolling for the transportation service was by riding with a friend or family member (60%). Among the 67,883 rides given, nondrivers took the majority (69%) of rides. Medical rides were the most common, accounting for 40% of all rides. CONCLUSIONS: Reported ride usage suggests that older adults are willing to use such ride services for a variety of trips when these services are not limited to specific types (e.g., medical). Further research can help tailor strategies to encourage both nondrivers and drivers to make better use of alternative transportation that meets the special needs of older people.
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