OBJECTIVE. We used screening tests administered by a certified driving rehabilitation specialist and by Parkinson's disease (PD) specialty neurologists to develop a model to predict on-road outcomes for patients with PD.METHOD. We administered a battery of screening tests to 41 patients with PD and 41 age-matched control participants before on-road testing. We used statistical models to predict actual on-road performance.RESULTS. The PD group had a higher failure rate, indicating more on-road errors. For the PD participants, the Useful Field of View (UFOV) Subtest 2 and Rapid Pace Walk were responsible for most of the variance in the on-road test. The model accurately categorized pass-fail outcomes for 81% of PD patients.CONCLUSION. Clinical screening batteries may be predictive of driving performance in PD. The UFOV Subtest 2, administered in approximately 15 min, may be the single most useful clinical test for such predictions.

In this pilot study among PD patients, the UFOV may be a superior screening measure (compared to other measures of disease, cognition, and vision) for predicting on-road driving performance but its rigor must be verified in a larger sample of people with PD.

To assist clinicians and researchers in making decisions regarding testing the driving performance of people with TBI, we provide recommendations for neuropsychological tests; off-road tests; self-report, other report, and postinjury disability status; and comprehensive driving evaluation.

OBJECTIVE. We determined differences in driving errors between combat veterans with mild traumatic brain injury and posttraumatic stress disorder and healthy control participants.METHOD. We compared 18 postdeployed combat veterans with 20 control participants on driving errors in a driving simulator. RESULTS.Combat veterans were more likely to be male; were younger; and had more racial diversity, less formal education, and lower cognitive scores than control participants. CONCLUSION. Combat veterans made more critical driving errors than did control participants. Such errors made on the road may lead to crashes or injuries. Although limited in generalizability, these findings provide early support for developing safe driving interventions for combat veterans.

No abstract