Home > Journals > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine > Past Issues > Europa Medicophysica 2001 December;37(4) > Europa Medicophysica 2001 December;37(4):245-55

CURRENT ISSUE
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL AND REHABILITATION MEDICINE

A Journal on Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation after Pathological Events


Official Journal of the Italian Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (SIMFER), European Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ESPRM), European Union of Medical Specialists - Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Section (UEMS-PRM), Mediterranean Forum of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (MFPRM), Hellenic Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (EEFIAP)
In association with International Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ISPRM)
Indexed/Abstracted in: CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,827


eTOC

 

  RETURN TO DRIVING AFTER TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY - Part I
Guest Editors: Bruno Gradenigo, Anna Mazzucchi
FREEfree


Europa Medicophysica 2001 December;37(4):245-55

Copyright © 2009 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Traffic psychology test battery: preliminary normative data for Italian population compared with traumatic brain injured skills

Martelli S., Mazzucchi A.

From the Centro Cardinal Ferrari, Fontanellato (Parma)


FULL TEXT  


Background. The abil­ity to ­drive a ­car rep­re­sents ­today an essen­tial com­po­nent of inde­pen­dent ­life. Standardised meth­ods ­for judg­ing ­car driv­ing abil­ities ­are lack­ing.
Methods. The ­present ­research ­would con­trib­ute to ­obtain stan­dar­dised meth­ods to eval­u­ate ­the ­car driv­ing abil­ities ­after ­TBI in Italy, sub­mit­ting a ref­er­ence ­group of 38 nor­mal sub­jects ­and a ­group of 31 ­TBI to 8 ­tasks includ­ed in ­the Traffic Psychology Vienna Test Battery.
Results. The ­scores ­obtained by ­the Italian nor­mal sam­ple ­respect to ­the Austrian nor­mal sam­ple ­are ­not sig­nif­i­cant­ly dif­fer­ent in 11 ­out of ­the 14 con­sid­ered param­e­ters. The select­ed 8 ­tasks (14 param­e­ters), ­part of ­the ­VTS, ­seem ­very sen­si­tive in ­detect dif­fer­enc­es ­between ­the Italian nor­mal ­matched sub­jects ­and ­the ­TBI Italian sub­jects. The pre­lim­i­nary com­par­i­son of ­scores ­obtained by ­two ­TBI sub­groups (Driving vs Not-Driving) ­shows ­very ­small dif­fer­enc­es ­and sug­gests ­the legit­i­ma­cy of ­doubts report­ed by dif­fer­ent authors in lit­er­a­ture ­about ­the neces­sity to sub­mit ­TBI sub­jects to an exhaus­tive assess­ment ­BEFORE ­return to driv­ing.
Conclusions. The ­next ­research ­step ­would be rep­re­sent­ed by ­the assess­ment of ­real ­drive ­skills on ­road of ­the ­same ­group of ­TBI sub­jects apply­ing an obser­va­tion in ­vivo ­made by a driv­ing instruc­tor to ver­i­fy ­the reli­abil­ity of ­the ­VTS select­ed ­tasks in dis­crim­i­nat­ing ­bad ­and ­good driv­ers.

top of page

Publication History

Cite this article as

Corresponding author e-mail