A virtual second opinion: Acceptability of a computer-based decision tool to assess older drivers with dementia

Clinicians face challenges in deciding which older patients with dementia to report to transportation administrators. This study used a qualitative thematic analysis to understand the utility and limitations of implementing a computer-based Driving in Dementia Decision Tool in clinical practice. Thirteen physicians and eight nurse practitioners participated in an interview to discuss their experience using the tool. While many participants felt the tool provided a useful 'virtual second opinion', specialist physicians felt that the tool did not add value to their clinical practice. Barriers to using the Driving in Dementia Decision Tool included lack of integration with electronic medical records and inability to capture certain contextual nuances. Opinions varied about the impact of the tool on the relationship of clinicians with patients and their families. The Driving in Dementia Decision Tool was judged most useful by nurse practitioners and least useful by specialist physicians. This work highlights the importance of tailoring knowledge translation interventions to particular practices.

Computer-Based Driving in Dementia Decision Tool With Mail Support: Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Physicians often find significant challenges in assessing automobile driving in persons with mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia and deciding when to report to transportation administrators. Care must be taken to balance the safety of patients and other road users with potential negative effects of issuing such reports.

Objective

The aim of this study was to assess whether a computer-based Driving in Dementia Decision Tool (DD-DT) increased appropriate reporting of patients with mild dementia or mild cognitive impairment to transportation administrators.

Methods

The study used a parallel-group cluster nonblinded randomized controlled trial design to test a multifaceted knowledge translation intervention. The intervention included a computer-based decision support system activated by the physician-user, which provides a recommendation about whether to report patients with mild dementia or mild cognitive impairment to transportation administrators, based on an algorithm derived from earlier work. The intervention also included a mailed educational package and Web-based specialized reporting forms. Specialists and family physicians with expertise in dementia or care of the elderly were stratified by sex and randomized to either use the DD-DT or a control version of the tool that required identical data input as the intervention group, but instead generated a generic reminder about the reporting legislation in Ontario, Canada. The trial ran from September 9, 2014 to January 29, 2016, and the primary outcome was the number of reports made to the transportation administrators concordant with the algorithm.

Results

A total of 69 participating physicians were randomized, and 36 of these used the DD-DT; 20 of the 35 randomized to the intervention group used DD-DT with 114 patients, and 16 of the 34 randomized to the control group used it with 103 patients. The proportion of all assessed patients reported to the transportation administrators concordant with recommendation did not differ between the intervention and the control groups (50% vs 49%; Z=−0.19, P=.85). Two variables predicted algorithm-based reporting—caregiver concern (odds ratio [OR]=5.8, 95% CI 2.5-13.6, P<.001) and abnormal clock drawing (OR 6.1, 95% CI 3.1-11.8, P<.001).

Conclusions

On the basis of this quantitative analysis, in-office abnormal clock drawing and expressions of concern about driving from caregivers substantially influenced physicians to report patients with mild dementia or mild cognitive impairment to transportation administrators, but the DD-DT tool itself did not increase such reports among these expert physicians.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02036099; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02036099 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6zGMF1ky8)

Development of a decision-making tool for reporting drivers with mild dementia and mild cognitive impairment to transportation administrators

BACKGROUND

Driving in persons with dementia poses risks that must be counterbalanced with the importance of the care for autonomy and mobility. Physicians often find substantial challenges in the assessment and reporting of driving safety for persons with dementia. This paper describes a driving in dementia decision tool (DD-DT) developed to aid physicians in deciding when to report older drivers with either mild dementia or mild cognitive impairment to local transportation administrators.

METHODS

A multi-faceted, computerized decision support tool was developed, using a systematic literature and guideline review, expert opinion from an earlier Delphi study, as well as qualitative interviews and focus groups with physicians, caregivers of former drivers with dementia, and transportation administrators. The tool integrates inputs from the physician-user about the patient's clinical and driving history as well as cognitive findings, and it produces a recommendation for reporting to transportation administrators. This recommendation is translated into a customized reporting form for the transportation authority, if applicable, and additional resources are provided for the patient and caregiver.

CONCLUSIONS

An innovative approach was needed to develop the DD-DT. The literature and guideline review confirmed the algorithm derived from the earlier Delphi study, and barriers identified in the qualitative research were incorporated into the design of the tool.

Developing physician consensus on the reporting of patients with mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia to transportation authorities in a region with mandatory reporting legislation

OBJECTIVE

To establish consensus among dementia experts about which patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild dementia should be reported to transportation authorities.

METHODS

We conducted a literature review of predictors of driving safety in patients with dementia and combined these into 26 case scenarios. Using a modified Delphi technique, case scenarios were reviewed by 38 dementia experts (geriatric psychiatrists, geriatricians, cognitive neurologists and family physicians with expertise in elder care) who indicated whether or not they would report the patient in each scenario to regional transportation authorities and recommend a specialized on-road driving test. Scenarios were presented up to five times to achieve consensus, defined as 85% agreement, and discrepancies were discussed anonymously online.

RESULTS

By the end of the fifth iteration, there was cumulative consensus on 18 scenarios (69%). The strongest predictors of decision to report were the combination of caregiver concern about the patient's driving and abnormal Clock Drawing Test, which accounted for 62% of the variance in decision to report at the same time as or without a road test (p <0.01). Based on these data, an algorithm was developed to guide physician decision-making about reporting patients with MCI or mild dementia to transportation authorities.

CONCLUSION

This study supports existing international guidelines that recommend specialized on-road testing when driving safety is uncertain for patients with MCI and emphasizes the importance of assessing executive dysfunction and caregiver concern about driving.