Analysis of Personal, Environmental and Occupational Factors Effecting Activity Performance of Disabled Drivers (original) (raw)

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışma, sürüş yapan engelli sürücülerin performansındaki çevresel, kişisel ve mesleki faktörleri analiz etmek için planlandı. Yöntemler: Çalışmaya ortopedik 20 (grup II) ve 20 nörolojik özürlü (grup I) kişi alındı. Değerlendirmeler için Loewenstein Ergoterapi Kognitif Değerlendirme (LOTCA), İz Sürme Testi (TMT), kalk yürü testi ve sıralı ayak basma testi, Craig Hastanesi Çevresel Faktörler Envanteri (CHIEF-SF) ve yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme yöntemleri kullanılmıştır. Bulgular: Grup I'de 10 kadın ve 10 erkeğin yaş ortalaması 33.9 ± 12.05 yıl, II. grupta 19 erkek ve 1 kadında ortalama yaş 36.5 ± 12.45 yıl olarak bulundu. Grup I, sürüş yetkinliği için gerekli olan sürüş öncesi test normlarına uymayı başaramamış, diğer yandan olarak II. Grup sürüşe ilişkin yeterli puan almış. Visio-motor organizasyon ve düşünme operasyonları LOTCA'nın alt ölçekleri grup I'de baz puanlardan anlamlı derecede düşüktü (p <0.05). Her iki grup da CHIEF-SF'te farklı bariyerler belirttiler. Sonuç: Çalışmamız, katılımcımız için sürüşün önemli bir aktivite olduğunu göstermiştir. Ancak, rehabilitasyon hizmetlerinin eksikliği ve sürüş için yasalar sürüş katılımını ve dolayısıyla sosyal katılımı etkileyebilir. Engelli bireylerin etkinlik performansını ve katılımını artırmak için sürüş rehabilitasyon hizmetlerinin, toplum sürüş bilincini, kanun koyucu bilincini sağlamak önemlidir. Anahtar Sözcükler: Ergoterapi, engelli kişiler, günlük yaşam aktiviteleri Objective: This study was planned to analyse environmental, personal and occupational factors on disabled drivers' performance who had been driving. Methods: Twenty orthopedically (group II) and 20 neurologically disabled (group I) people were included in the study. Loewenstein Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment (LOTCA), Trail Making Test (TMT), rapid pace walk test and alternate foot tap test, The Craig Hospital Inventory of Environmental Factors (CHIEF-SF) and semistructured interview methods were used for assessments. Results: Group I included 10 women and 10 men with mean age 33.9±12.05 years; group II included 19 men and 1 woman with mean age 36.5±12.45 years. Group I had not been able to comply with pre-driving test norms that needed for driving competency, controversially group II had proficient scores related to driving. Visiomotor organisation and thinking operations sub-scales of LOTCA were significantly lower than base scores (p<0.05) in group I. Both groups defined barriers in CHIEF-SF. Conclusion: Our study showed driving for our participant was an important activity. But lack of rehabilitation services and laws for driving might effect driving participation thus social participation. It is important to enabling driving rehabilitation services, community awareness of driving, law-maker awareness to enhance disabled people's activity performance and participation.

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (24)

  1. The American Occupational Therapy Association. Occupational therapy practice framework: Domain and process (2nd ed.). American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2008;62:625-83.
  2. Beverly Foundation. Community Effectiveness in Safeguarding at- risk senior drivers Pasadena, Calif: Beverly Foundation; 1998.
  3. AA Foundation for Traffic Safety. Beverly Foundation: Transportation alternatives for seniors: high cost problems low cos solutions. In: Safety AFfT, editor. 2004.
  4. Bolding D, Adler C, Tripton-Burton M, Verran A. Occupational Performance and The Performance Areas: Evaluation and Bezmialem Science 2019
  5. Gezer et al. Pancreatic tumours Intervention. In: Pendleton H. Mc , Schultz-Krohn W, editors. Pedretti's Occupational Therapy Practice Skills for Physical Dysfunction. USA: Elsevier; 2006. p. 264-95.
  6. Marshall SC, Molnar F, Man-Son-Hing M, Blair R, Brosseau L, Finestone HM, et al. Predictors of driving ability following stroke: a systematic review. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation. 2007;14(1):98- 114.
  7. Wheatley CJ, Pellerito JM, Jr.,, Redepenning S. The Clinical Evaluation. In: Pellerito JM, Jr.,, editor. Driver Rehabilitation and Community Mobility: Principles and Practice. Missouri, USA: Elsevier, Mosby; 2006. p. 103-65.
  8. Turkish Republic National Police Department Traffic Services. Turkish Republic National Police Department Car and Driver Licence Statistics,. In: Turkish Republic National Police Department Traffic Services, editor. Turkish Republic National Police Department Traffic Services,2010.
  9. Tong S, Brougton J, Tong R. Data gathering on disability and driving statistics, Stage 2:final report. United Nations: Department for Transport; 2007. Report No.: PPR156.
  10. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of transportation statistics. Freedom to Travel. Washington, DC2003.
  11. The American Occupational Therapy Association. Driving and Community Mobility. American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2010;64(6):112-25.
  12. Korner-Bitensky N, Bitensky J, Sofer S, Man-Son-Hing M, Gelinas I. Driving evaluation practices of clinicians working in the United States and Canada. The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association. 2006;60(4):428-34.
  13. Stapleton T, Connelly D. Occupational therapy practice in predriving assessment post stroke in the Irish context: findings from a nominal group technique meeting. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation. 2012;17(1):58-68.
  14. Katz N, Itzkovich M, Averbuch S, Elazar B. Loewenstein Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment (LOTCA) battery for brain-injured patients: reliability and validity. American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 1989;43(3):184-92.
  15. Reitan RM. The relation of the trail making test to organic brain damage. Journal of consulting psychology. 1955;19(5):393.
  16. Akinwuntan AE, Feys H, De Weerdt W, Baten G, Arno P, Kiekens C. Prediction of driving after stroke: a prospective study. Neurorehabilitation and neural repair. 2006;20(3):417-23.
  17. Mazer BL, Korner-Bitensky NA, Sofer S. Predicting ability to drive after stroke. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation. 1998;79(7):743-50.
  18. Classen S. Consensus statements on driving in people with Parkinson's disease. Occupational therapy in health care. 2014;28(2):140-7.
  19. American Medical Association. Physician's Guide to Assessing Older Driver. In: American Medical Association, editor. 2010.
  20. van Zomeren AH, Brouwer WH, Minderhoud JM. Acquired brain damage and driving: a review. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation. 1987;68(10):697-705.
  21. Galski T, Bruno RL, Ehle HT. Prediction of behind-the-wheel driving performance in patients with cerebral brain damage: a discriminant function analysis. The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association. 1993;47(5):391-6.
  22. Cox DJ, Quillian WC, Thorndike FP, Kovatchev BP, Hanna G. Evaluating driving performance of outpatients with Alzheimer disease. The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice / American Board of Family Practice. 1998;11(4):264-71.
  23. Salar S. The Effects of Environmental Factors to Community Participation and Life Satisfaction in People with Spinal Cord Injury. Ankara: Hacettepe University; 2011.
  24. Lundqvist A, Rönnberg J. Driving problems and adaptive driving behaviourafter brain injury: A qualitative assessment. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation. 2001;11(2):171-85.