The Combination of Two Training Approaches to Improve Older Adults' Driving Safety

Abstract

Objective. An increasing number of older adults rely on the automobile for transportation. Educational approaches based on the specific needs of older drivers may help to optimize safe driving. We examined if the combination of an in-class education program with on-road education would lead to improvements in older drivers' knowledge of safe driving practices and on-road driving evaluations.

Methods. We used a multisite, randomized controlled trial approach. Participants in the intervention group received the in-class and on-road education; those in the control group waited and were offered the education afterwards. We measured knowledge of safe driving practices before and after the in-class component of the program and on-road driving skills before and after the whole program. Results. Participants' knowledge improved from 61% of correct answers before the in-class education component to 81% after (p < .001). The on-road evaluation results suggested improvements on some aspects of safe driving (e.g., moving in roadway, p < .05) but not on others.

Conclusions. The results of this study demonstrate that education programs focused on the needs of older drivers may help improve their knowledge of safe driving practices and actual driving performance. Further research is required to determine if these changes will affect other variables such as driver confidence and crash rates.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors thank Terry Willie from Young Drivers of Canada (Thunder Bay) for his assistance with the on-road training component and Judy Baker for her assistance with the driving evaluations. The authors would also like to acknowledge Kyla Huebner, Linda Johnson, and Grace Galezowski for their work at the Winnipeg site and Jennifer Biggs and Anita Jessup for their work at the Ottawa site. Michel Bédard is a Canada Research Chair in Aging and Health (www.chairs.gc.ca); he acknowledges the support of the Canada Research Chair Program. Funding for this research was provided through a research grant from AUTO21, Network of Centres of Excellence, and the Thunder Bay Foundation. MB, MMP, SM, HT, FM, and JM-P are members of CanDRIVE, a New Emerging Team funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Institute of Aging; we acknowledge the support of CanDRIVE. The sponsors were not involved in any aspects of this study.

Notes

¹It is more conventional to use the follow-up score as the outcome variable rather than the change score. We chose to use the change score because the F-test comparing Intervention and Control is unaffected, and because we wanted to report the adjusted mean change, which requires use of the change scores.

¹Values are means (SD). The adjusted means were derived from an analysis using a pooled standard deviation; therefore, the standard deviation values are identical for the intervention and control groups.

¹Values are means (SD). The adjusted means were derived from an analysis using a pooled standard deviation; therefore, the standard deviation values are identical for the intervention and control groups.