Antidepressants and Driving in Older Adults: A Systematic Review

Association of Depression and Antidepressant Use With Driving Behaviors in Older Adults: A LongROAD Study

Older adults aged 70 and older who drive have higher crash death rates per mile driven compared to middle aged (35-54 years) adults who drive in the US. Prior studies have found that depression and or antidepressant medication use in older adults are associated with an increase in the vehicular crash rate. Using data from the prospective multi-site AAA Longitudinal Research on Aging Drivers Study, this analysis examined the independent and interdependent associations of self-reported depression and antidepressant use with driving behaviors that can increase motor vehicle crash risk such as hard braking, speeding, and night-time driving in adults over age 65. Of the 2951 participants, 6.4% reported having depression and 21.9% were on an antidepressant medication. Correcting for age, race, gender, and education level, participants on an antidepressant had increased hard braking events (1.22 [1.10-1.34]) but self-reported depression alone was not associated with changes in driving behaviors.

A Systematic Review of the Risks of Motor Vehicle Crashes Associated with Psychiatric Disorders

OBJECTIVE

Psychiatric disorders and their treatments have the potential to adversely impact driving skills. However, it is unclear to what extent this poses a public health risk by increasing the risk of motor vehicle crashes (MVCs). The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize and critically appraise evidence on the risk of MVC for drivers with psychiatric disorders.

METHOD

We conducted a systematic review of the MVC risk associated with psychiatric disorders using seven databases in November 2019. Two reviewers examined each study and extracted data. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Quality Assessment tools were used to assess each study's quality of evidence.

RESULTS

We identified 24 studies that met the inclusion criteria, including eight cohort, 10 case-control, and six cross-sectional designs. Quality assessment ratings were "Good" for four studies, "Fair" for 10, and "Poor" for 10. Self-report or questionnaires were used in place of objective measures of either MVC, psychiatric disorder, or both in 12 studies, and only seven adjusted for driving exposure. Fifteen studies reported an increased risk of MVC associated with psychiatric disorders, and nine did not. There was no category of disorder that was consistently associated with increased MVC risk.

CONCLUSION

The available evidence is mixed, not of high quality, and does not support a blanket restriction on drivers with psychiatric disorder. An individualized approach, as recommended by international guidelines, should continue. Further research should include objective assessments of psychiatric disorders and MVC risk and adjust for driving exposure.

Use of psychotropic medication and risk of road traffic crashes: a registry-based case-control study in Denmark, 1996-2018

RATIONALE

Use of psychotropics is relatively prevalent amongst motor vehicle drivers because mobility is also important for persons suffering from psychiatric illness. However, medication side effects may increase the likelihood of being involved in traffic crashes.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the association between the use of four types of medication (antipsychotics, benzodiazepines and z-hypnotics, antidepressants and stimulants of ADHD treatment) and the risk of traffic crashes, in general, and single crashes subsequently.

METHOD

We conducted a case-control study of data from 130,000 drivers involved in traffic crashes with personal injury and prescription data from all of Denmark during the period 1996-2018.

RESULTS

For antipsychotics, we found odds ratios of 0.86 and 1.29 for traffic crashes and single crashes, respectively; for benzodiazepines and z-hypnotics, 1.29 and 2.49, respectively; for antidepressants, 1.30 and 2.25, respectively; and for stimulants of ADHD treatment, 1.62 and 1.95, respectively. All p values were below 0.001.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our results on twofold increased risks of single crashes and moderately increased risks in persons with ADHD, it might seem tempting to ban psychotropic medication in traffic. Conversely, we accept increased risks of traffic crashes in young drivers and in the physically disabled with special aids and, to some extent, with exposure to alcohol. In the end, it is the authorities who must review the evidence and decide whether to prohibit (some types of) psychotropic medication in traffic. Finally, underlying disease and not the drug may increase the risk of being involved in a traffic crash.

Driving ability in patients with dizziness: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review was to identify and evaluate studies dealing with driving performance of dizzy patients or patients with a vestibular disorder.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines. (1) PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library. (2) Study selection: articles about driving ability and reported driving difficulties in patients with dizziness, or a diagnosed vestibular disorder, were included. (3) Data extraction was performed by two independent authors using predefined data fields: patient's characteristics, diagnostic criteria, sample size, and type of evaluation of driving ability and outcome of the study.

RESULTS

Eight out of 705 articles matched the inclusion criteria but varied widely regarding the study population, study design, and outcome measures. The majority of studies reported a negative impact of dizziness and/or vestibular disorders on self-reported driving ability and car accidents. Yet several studies could not identify any impairment of driving ability.

CONCLUSIONS

Driving ability was negatively affected by dizziness or a vestibular disorder in the majority of included studies with low risk of bias. This systematic review revealed a significant heterogeneity in studies reporting driving performance and contradictory results. We were, therefore, unable to identify a causal relationship between dizziness and driving ability. There is a need for prospective studies in populations with different vestibular disorders using subjective and objective outcome measures that have been validated to evaluate driving performance.

Scared to Trust? - Predicting Trust in Highly Automated Driving by Depressiveness, Negative Self-Evaluations and State Anxiety

The advantages of automated driving can only come fully into play if these systems are used in an appropriate way, which means that they are neither used in situations they are not designed for (misuse) nor used in a too restricted manner (disuse). Trust in automation has been found to be an essential psychological basis for appropriate interaction with automated systems. Well-balanced system use requires a calibrated level of trust in correspondence with the actual ability of an automated system. As for these far-reaching implications of trust for safe and efficient system use, the psychological processes, in which trust is dynamically calibrated prior and during the use of automated technology, need to be understood. At this point, only a restricted body of research investigated the role of personality and emotional states for the formation of trust in automated systems. In this research, the role of the personality variables depressiveness, self-efficacy, self-esteem, and locus of control for the experience of anxiety before the first experience with a highly automated driving system were investigated. Additionally, the relationship of the investigated personality variables and anxiety to subsequent formation of trust in automation was investigated. In a driving simulator study, personality variables and anxiety were measured before the interaction with an automated system. Trust in the system was measured after participants drove with the system for a while. Trust in the system was significantly predicted by state anxiety and the personality characteristics self-esteem and self-efficacy. The relationships of self-esteem and self-efficacy were mediated by state anxiety as supported by significant specific indirect effects. While for depression the direct relationship with trust in automation was not found to be significant, an indirect effect through the experience of anxiety was supported. Locus of control did not show a significant association to trust in automation. The reported findings support the importance of considering individual differences in negative self-evaluations and anxiety when being introduced to a new automated system for individual differences in trust in automation. Implications for future research as well as implications for the design of automated technology in general and automated driving systems are discussed.