It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Background and Objectives
Older drivers are overrepresented in collisions at intersections while making left turns across oncoming traffic. Using naturalistic driving methods, we evaluated the association between vision impairment and their left-turn characteristics.
Research Design and Methods
In this prospective, observational study, vision impairment as defined by visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, visual processing speed, visual field sensitivity, and motion perception was assessed in drivers ≥70 years old. Data acquisition systems were installed in their personal vehicles recording video and vehicle kinematics. Driving during everyday life was recorded for 6 months. Data analysts evaluated a temporal data window surrounding randomly selected left turns at 4-way intersections. Left-turn traversals and turning behavior were evaluated in terms of age-adjusted associations with vision impairment.
Results
The sample consisted of 151 older drivers. The number of turns studied was 473; 265 turns were rated as unsafe traversals, and 201 as problematic turning behavior. Drivers with slowed visual processing speed and visual field impairment were less likely to exhibit unsafe traversals (p < .05); those with worse contrast sensitivity, slowed visual processing speed, and visual field impairment were less likely to exhibit problematic turning behavior (p < .05).
Discussion and Implications
Using naturalistic driving, our study suggests older drivers with vision impairment exhibit better performance in making left turns than those without deficits, which contradicts older driver studies on left turns using driving simulators and on-road driving evaluations. Our findings suggest more cautious and self-regulatory behavior, which are consistent with older visually impaired drivers’ commonly expressed concerns about their driving difficulties.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Department of Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham Birmingham, Alabama, USA
2 Department of Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham Birmingham, Alabama, USA; Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA
3 Vulnerable Road User Safety, Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA
4 Centre for Vision and Eye Research, School of Optometry and Vision Science, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia