An online driving decision aid for older drivers reduces ambivalence and regret about driving decisions: Randomized trial.

Carolyn G DiGuiseppi, Linda L Hill, Nicole R Fowler, Rachel L Johnson, Ryan A Peterson, S Duke Han, Brandon Josewski, Christopher E Knoepke, Daniel D Matlock, Faris Omeragic, Marian E Betz
{"title":"An online driving decision aid for older drivers reduces ambivalence and regret about driving decisions: Randomized trial.","authors":"Carolyn G DiGuiseppi, Linda L Hill, Nicole R Fowler, Rachel L Johnson, Ryan A Peterson, S Duke Han, Brandon Josewski, Christopher E Knoepke, Daniel D Matlock, Faris Omeragic, Marian E Betz","doi":"10.1111/jgs.19293","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Decisions about driving cessation can be stressful for older adults. We tested effects of a driving decision aid (DDA) on psychosocial outcomes among older drivers during two-year follow-up.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Multisite randomized controlled trial of licensed drivers ages ≥70 with at least one diagnosis associated with increased likelihood of driving cessation, without significant cognitive impairment. The intervention was the online Healthwise® DDA, addressing \"Is it time to stop driving?\"; controls received National Institute on Aging web-based information for older drivers. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Primary outcomes were the Decision Regret Scale, Decisional Conflict Scale (assessing decisional ambivalence or uncertainty), and PROMIS Depression (4a) Scale. Self-reported Life-Space Assessment (assessing community mobility), crashes and driving outcomes were also assessed. Using intention-to-treat analyses, we tested whether DDA (vs. control) effects on each outcome differed during follow-up using a study group by time interaction. Longitudinal outcomes were modeled using generalized linear mixed models, accounting for repeated measures, age, site, and baseline visit before vs. during COVID.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We enrolled 301 participants (age at enrollment: mean 77.1 (range 70-92) years; 51% identifying as female). During follow-up, the DDA group had less decisional conflict (p<sub>interaction</sub> = 0.010) and decision regret (p<sub>interaction</sub> = 0.012). The DDA had its greatest effect on decisional conflict immediately post-intervention (adjusted mean ratio [aMR] = 0.87; 95%CI: 0.79, 0.97) and on decision regret at 12-month follow-up (aMR = 0.45; 95%CI: 0.27, 0.72). Odds of depression were similar between groups during follow-up (p<sub>interaction</sub> = 0.237). The intervention did not negatively affect life space, crashes, or other driving outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In older drivers, the Healthwise® DDA reduced uncertainty and regret about driving decisions during longitudinal follow-up, without adversely affecting community mobility or crash risk. Use of DDAs in clinical and other settings may reduce the distress older adults often experience when making decisions about driving cessation.</p>","PeriodicalId":94112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.19293","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Decisions about driving cessation can be stressful for older adults. We tested effects of a driving decision aid (DDA) on psychosocial outcomes among older drivers during two-year follow-up.

Methods: Multisite randomized controlled trial of licensed drivers ages ≥70 with at least one diagnosis associated with increased likelihood of driving cessation, without significant cognitive impairment. The intervention was the online Healthwise® DDA, addressing "Is it time to stop driving?"; controls received National Institute on Aging web-based information for older drivers. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Primary outcomes were the Decision Regret Scale, Decisional Conflict Scale (assessing decisional ambivalence or uncertainty), and PROMIS Depression (4a) Scale. Self-reported Life-Space Assessment (assessing community mobility), crashes and driving outcomes were also assessed. Using intention-to-treat analyses, we tested whether DDA (vs. control) effects on each outcome differed during follow-up using a study group by time interaction. Longitudinal outcomes were modeled using generalized linear mixed models, accounting for repeated measures, age, site, and baseline visit before vs. during COVID.

Results: We enrolled 301 participants (age at enrollment: mean 77.1 (range 70-92) years; 51% identifying as female). During follow-up, the DDA group had less decisional conflict (pinteraction = 0.010) and decision regret (pinteraction = 0.012). The DDA had its greatest effect on decisional conflict immediately post-intervention (adjusted mean ratio [aMR] = 0.87; 95%CI: 0.79, 0.97) and on decision regret at 12-month follow-up (aMR = 0.45; 95%CI: 0.27, 0.72). Odds of depression were similar between groups during follow-up (pinteraction = 0.237). The intervention did not negatively affect life space, crashes, or other driving outcomes.

Conclusions: In older drivers, the Healthwise® DDA reduced uncertainty and regret about driving decisions during longitudinal follow-up, without adversely affecting community mobility or crash risk. Use of DDAs in clinical and other settings may reduce the distress older adults often experience when making decisions about driving cessation.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信