Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 28, 2026
Driving Simulation in the Clinic: Testing Visual Exploratory Behavior in Daily Life Activities in Patients with Visual Field Defects
Published on: September 18, 2012
Determinants of On-Road Driving in Multiple Sclerosis
Hannes Devos1, Maud Ranchet2, Deborah Backus3
1Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Science, School of Health Professions, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS; Department of Physical Therapy, College of Allied Health Sciences, Augusta University, Augusta, GA.
Objective:
To investigate the cognitive, visual, and motor deficits underlying poor performance on different dimensions of on-road driving in individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS).
Design:
Prospective cross-sectional study.
Setting:
MS clinic and driving simulator lab.
Participants:
Active drivers (N=102) with various types of MS.
Interventions:
Not applicable.
Main Outcome Measures:
Off-road cognitive, visual, and motor functions, as well as 13 specific driving skills. These skills were categorized into hierarchic clusters of operational, tactical, visuo-integrative, and mixed driving. Stepwise regression analysis was used to determine the off-road functions influencing performance on the on-road test and each cluster.
Results:
Visuospatial function (P=.002), inhibition (P=.008), binocular acuity (P=.04), vertical visual field (P=.02), and stereopsis (P=.03) best determined variance in total on-road score (unadjusted R2=.37). Attentional shift (P=.0004), stereopsis (P=.007), glare recovery (P=.047), and use of assistive devices (P=.03) best predicted the operational cluster (unadjusted R2=.28). Visuospatial function (P=.002), inhibition (P=.002), reasoning (P=.003), binocular acuity (P=.04), and stereopsis (P=.005) best determined the tactical cluster (unadjusted R2=.41). The visuo-integrative model (unadjusted R2=.12) comprised binocular acuity (P=.007) and stereopsis (P=.045). Inhibition (P=.0001) and binocular acuity (P=.001) provided the best model of the mixed cluster (unadjusted R2=.25).
Conclusions:
Our results provide more insights into the specific impairments that influence different dimensions of on-road driving and may be used as a framework for targeted driving intervention programs in MS.
