Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Nov-Dec;23(10):2654-2670.
doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2014.06.010. Epub 2014 Oct 11.

Cognitive, on-road, and simulator-based driving assessment after stroke

Affiliations

Cognitive, on-road, and simulator-based driving assessment after stroke

Megan A Hird et al. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2014 Nov-Dec.

Abstract

Driving is a complex activity that requires intact cognitive, behavioral, and motor function. Stroke is one of the most prevalent neurologic impairments and can affect all of these functions. However, diagnosis of stroke is not a definitive indicator of driving impairment. Determining fitness to drive after stroke is a very complex process and is typically based on cognitive assessments, on-road performance, simulator-based assessment, or a combination of the three. The aim of this review was to provide (1) a systematic review of the literature on cognitive, on-road, and simulator assessment after stroke, and (2) address the existing limitations and inconsistencies in stroke and driving research. Our results indicated that of 1413 total stroke patients, 748 definitively passed and 367 definitely failed an on-road assessment, with minimal information provided about clinical presentation. In addition, although the Stroke Driver Screening Assessment, the Useful Field of View Test, and the Rey-O Complex Figure test may have some utility in predicting driving performance, most cognitive measures have been inconsistently and minimally explored. Several limitations were observed across studies such as procedural inconsistencies, including outcome variables used (eg, driving cessation and pass/fail classification) and the heterogeneity of patient samples (eg, time since stroke and stroke location). Due, in part, to the larger variability in results of cognitive, on-road, and simulator-based assessment, there is no consensus regarding a valid and reliable driving assessment for physicians. Future studies should assess poststroke driving fitness by differentiating different stages, severities, and locations of stroke.

Keywords: Stroke; assessment; cognitive; driving; driving simulation; on-road.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources