Establishing criterion validity of the Useful Field of View assessment and Stroke Drivers' Screening Assessment: comparison to the result of on-road assessment.
OBJECTIVE
We sought to determine the criterion validity of the Useful Field of View (UFOV) assessment and Stroke Drivers' Screening Assessment (SDSA) through comparison to the results of on-road assessment.


METHODS
This was a prospective study with people with stroke. Outcome measures used were UFOV, SDSA, and the results of on-road assessment.


RESULTS
Both the results on UFOV (Divided Attention subtest, p<.01; Selective Attention subtest, p<.05) and SDSA (p<.05) were significantly related to the recommendation from on-road assessment. The Divided Attention subtest of the UFOV had the highest sensitivity value (88.9%).


CONCLUSIONS
UFOV and SDSA are valid assessments of driving ability for stroke. The Divided Attention subtest of the UFOV can guide decision making of occupational therapists in stroke driver rehabilitation and in determining those who require further assessment on road because they pose a safety risk. Screening assists people with stroke to decide whether they are ready to have an on-road assessment.
George
Stacey
S
Flinders University, Department of Rehabilitation and Aged Care, Repatriation General Hospital, Daws Road, Daw Park, South Australia 5041, Australia. stacey.george@health.sa.gov.au
Crotty
Maria
M
D000368:Aged; D001333:Automobile Driver Examination; D001334:Automobile Driving / Q000523:psychology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009048:Motor Skills; D009483:Neuropsychological Tests / Q000592:standards*; D009788:Occupational Therapy / Q000295:instrumentation*; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011594:Psychometrics; D018570:Risk Assessment / Q000379:methods; D012307:Risk Factors; D012449:Safety; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D013021:South Australia; D020521:Stroke / Q000503:physiopathology* / Q000523:psychology*