Reading of the speedometer value in elderly drivers with cognitive impairments: A comparison of analog and digital speedometer

Résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Background With cognitive functions deteriorated, the capability to get the information of speed, one of the essential element needed to perform safe driving1, may be influenced. We aim to investigate the reading of the speedometer (SM) values in elderly driver with cognitive impairments by comparing the recognition of analog and digital SM values, and examine its correlation with cognitive functions. Methods Elderly subjects with driving experience who visited the outpatient neurology clinic in the Kyoto university hospital for cognitive complaints from July 2018 to December 2019 were investigated. Cognitive tests were carried out, as well as a test asking participants to read the speed values of analog SM and digital SM presented on the iPad within the time limit. Results Among 48 participants slightly more than half of them returned their driving licenses (retired drivers) whereas 22 still hold a valid driving license (current drivers). Based on the result of Wilcoxon test, among all participants the result of reading test of digital SM had significant higher scores than analog SM (Z=‐3.996, p<0.0001). According to the Mann‐Whitney U test, there was no significantly different about their reading ability of both analog and digital SM values between current drivers and retired drivers. Additionally, the reading ability of digital SM was significantly correlated with the score of Mini‐mental state examination, block design test and clock drawing test. Conclusions Among elderly drivers with cognitive impairments, it was shown that digital SM was easier to read than analog SM. This newly gained information provides an innovative insight to the design of SM. Reference: Francois M, Osiurak F, Fort A, Crave P, Navarro J. Analogue versus digital speedometer: effects on distraction and usability for truck driving. European Conference on Human Centred Design for Intelligent Transport Systems; 2016‐06‐30, 2016; Loughborough, France.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.