Korean Journal of Occupational Therapy (대한작업치료학회지)

Korean Society of Occupational Therapy (대한작업치료학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Standardization of the Korean Drivers 65 plus to Identify Driving Fitness of Senior Drivers

한국형 노인 자가 운전 평가도구(K-Drivers 65 plus)의 표준화 연구

  • Han, Sang-Woo (Dept. of Occupational Therapy, Kwangju Women's University) ;
  • Lee, Jae-Shin (Dept. of Occupational Therapy, Konyang University) ;
  • Kim, Soo-Kyoung (Dept. of Occupational Therapy, Konyang University) ;
  • Cha, Tae-Hyun (Dept. of Occupational Therapy, Konyang University) ;
  • Yoo, Doo-Han (Dept. of Occupational Therapy, Konyang University) ;
  • Kim, Hee (Dept. of Occupational Therapy, Konyang University)
  • 한상우 (광주여자대학교 작업치료학과) ;
  • 이재신 (건양대학교 작업치료학과) ;
  • 김수경 (건양대학교 작업치료학과) ;
  • 차태현 (건양대학교 작업치료학과) ;
  • 유두한 (건양대학교 작업치료학과) ;
  • 김희 (건양대학교 작업치료학과)
  • Received : 2018.01.30
  • Accepted : 2018.03.04
  • Published : 2018.03.31
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study is to standardize a Korean Drivers 65 plus by evaluating its reliability and validity. Methods: After completing the final translation through verification, to verify the tool's reliability and validity, 218 senior drivers, aged 65 plus, were assessed through translated versions of Drivers 65 plus, K-DBQ and MoCA-K. Results: The translated version was completed after verification of translation and reverse translation, participant comprehensibility, and suitability; no questions were deleted or added. In reliability testing of the translated version of Drivers 65 plus, the internal reliability of the items was Cronbach's ${\alpha}=0.575$, and test-retest reliability was .95 by ICC. In the confirmatory factor analysis to verify construct validity, the model fit indices were as follows: NC=2.954, CFI=.806, TLI=.736, NFI=.742 and RMSEA=.095. K-Drivers 65 plus and K-DBQ had a significant positive correlation(r=.470, p<.01) while there was a significant negative correlation with MoCA-K(r=-.495, p<.01). When we tested the usefulness of the K-Drivers 65 plus to assess driving suitability in senior drivers, the AUC (.726) was confirmed to have normal accuracy in selecting suitability. K-Driver 65 plus distinguished those with a total score of 31 or more as Risk drivers and those with scores of less than 31 as Safe drivers. Conclusion: Although K-Drivers 65 did not show high reliability and validity in this study, it was proven to be an adequate self-assessment tool for two reasons: 1) it can be easily provided to a large number of elderly drivers and 2) it is possible to prevent accidents by predicting driving suitability based on the results.

목적 : 본 연구의 목적은 노인 운전자의 운전 적합성을 판별할 수 있는 Drivers 65 Plus에 대한 신뢰도와 타당도 검증을 걸쳐 한국형으로 표준화하기 위함이다. 연구방법 : 번역 검증을 통해 최종 번역본을 완성하고, 도구의 신뢰도와 타당도를 검증하기 위해 65세 이상의 노인 운전자 218명을 대상으로 K-Drivers 65 plus(Korean-Drivers 65 plus)와 K-DBQ(Korean Version-Driver Behavior Questionnaire), MoCA-K(Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Korean version)를 이용한 평가를 진행하였다. 결과 : K-Drivers 65 plus의 신뢰도 검증 결과, 문항들에 대한 내적 신뢰도는 Cronbach's ${\alpha}$가 0.575였으며, 검사-재검사 신뢰도는 ICC(Internal Classification Coefficients)가 .95를 나타내었다. 구성타당도를 검증하기 위한 확인적 요인분석에서는 모형 적합도 지수가 NC(Normed Chi-square)=2.954, CFI(Compaative Fit Index)=.806, TLI(Tucker-Lewis Index)=.736, NFI(Normed Fit Index)=.742, RMSEA(Root Mean Square Error of Approximation)=.095로 나타내었다. K-DBQ와 유의한 정적 상관(r=.470, p<.01)이 있는 것으로 확인되었으며, MoCA-K와의 결과에서도 유의한 부적 상관(r=-.495, p<.01)이 확인되었다. 유용성 검증에서는 ROC(Receiver Operating Characteristic) 곡선에서 참조선의 왼쪽 상단에 위치하는 경향을 보였으며, AUC(Area Under Curve)(.726)에서도 적합성을 선별하는데 보통의 정확성을 지니고 있다는 것이 확인되었다. 또한 30.5점(Youden's index=1.002)을 기준으로, 총점이 31점 이상인 경우 위험운전자, 31점 미만인 경우 안전운전자로 선별되었다. 결론 : 본 연구를 통해 K-Drivers 65 plus가 높은 신뢰도와 타당도를 나타내지 못했지만, 개인이 아닌 다수의 노인 운전자를 대상으로 간편하게 제공할 수 있고, 점수 결과를 바탕으로 운전 적합성을 예측하여 운전 사고를 예방할 수 있다는 측면에서 적합한 수준의 자가 운전 평가도구임을 증명할 수 있었다.

Keywords

References

  1. 노형진, 정한열. (2010). PASW 통계분석 입문. 서울, 한국: 한올출판사.
  2. American Automobile Association Foundation for Traffic Safety. (1994). Driver 55 plus: Check your own performance: A self-rating form of questions, facts and suggestions for safe driving.. Washington, DC: AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety.
  3. American Automobile Association Foundation for Traffic Safety. (2004). Driver 65 plus: Check Your Performance. Washington, DC: AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety.
  4. American Medical Association. (2003). Physician's guide to assessing and counseling older drivers. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
  5. Baumeister, R. F., & Vohs, K. D. (2007). Self-regulation, ego-depletion, and motivation. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 1(1), 115-128. doi:10.111/j.1751-9004.2007.00001.x
  6. Classen, S., Winter, S. M., Velozo, C. A., Bedard, M., Lanford, D. N., Brumback, B., & Lutz, B. J. (2010). Item development and validity testing for a self and proxy report: The safe driving behavior measure. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 64, 296-305. doi:10.5014/ajot.64.2.296
  7. Cronbach, L. .J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297-334. doi: 10.1007/bf02310555
  8. Cronbach, L. J. (2004). My current thoughts on coefficient alpha and successor procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 391-418. doi: 10.1177/0013164404266386
  9. Engen, T. (2008). Use and validation of driving simulators. Trondheim, Norway: Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
  10. Glendon, A. I., Dorn, L., Matthews, G., Gulian, E., Davies, D. R., & Debney, L. M. (1993). Reliability of the driving behaviour inventory. Ergonomics, 36, 719-726. doi:10.1080/00140139308967932
  11. Golisz, K. (2014). Occupatoinal therapy interventions to improve driving performance in older adults: A systematic review. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 68, 662-669. doi:10.5014/ajot.2014.011247
  12. Greiner, M., Pfeiffer, D., & Smith, R. D. (2000). Principles and practical aplication of the receiver-operating characteristic analysis for diagnostic tests. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 45(1), 23-41. doi:10.1016/S0167-5877(00)00115-X
  13. Hollis, A. M., Duncanson, H., Kapust, L. R., Xi, P. M., & O'Connor, M. G. (2015). Validity of the mini-mental state examination and the montreal cognitive assessment in the prediction of driving test outcome. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 63, 988-992. doi:10.1111/jgs.13384
  14. Jeong, Y. J. (2013). Korean safe driving behavior measure(K-SDBM): Development, reliability and validity(Master's thesis). Yonsei University, Seoul.
  15. Kanfer, R. (1986). Toward a unified theoretical framework of performance motivation: Situational and self-regulatory determinants. Paper presented at the 21st International Congress of Applied Psychology, Jerusalem: Israel. Retrieved from https://www.bvekennis.nl/Bibliotheek/15-0508.pdf
  16. Kang, D. H. (2003). The role of occupational therapists in the rehabilitation of drivers with physical disabilities. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, 11(2), 135-142.
  17. Lajunen, T., & Summala, H. (1995). Driver experience, personality, and skill and safety motive dimensions in drivers' self-assessments. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 307-318. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(95)00068-H
  18. Lee, J. Y., Lee, D. W., Cho, S. J., Na, D. L., Jeon, H. J., Kim, S. K., ... Cho, M. J. (2008). Brief screening for mild cognitive impairment in elderly outpatient clinic: Validation of the Korean version of the Montreal cognitive assessment. Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology, 21, 104-110. doi:10.1177/0891988708316855
  19. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2008). Traffic safety facts 2007 data: Older population. Washington, DC: NHTSA.
  20. Nasreddine, Z. S., Phillips, N. A., Bedirian, V., Charbonneau, S., Whitehead, V., Colin, I. ... Chertkow, H. (2005). The montreal cognitive assessment, MoCA: A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53, 695-699. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x
  21. Paker, D., Reason, J. T., Manstead, A. S. R., & Stradling, S. G. (1995). Driving errors, driving violations and accident involvement. Ergonomics, 38, 1036-1048. doi:10.1080/00140139508925170
  22. Park, S. J., Lee, S. C., Kim, J. H., & Kim, I. S. (2006). The effects of error and lapse on elderly driver's driving behaviour. Korean Journal of Culture and Social Issues, 12(1), 55-79.
  23. Reason, J., Manstead, A., Stradling, S., Baxter, J., & Campbell, K. (1990). Errors and violations on the roads: A real distinction? Ergonomics, 33, 1315-1332. doi:10.1080/00140139008925335
  24. Richardson, E. D., & Marottoli, R. A. (2003). Visual attention and driving behaviors among community-living older persons. Journals of Gerontology, Series A, 58, 832-836. doi:10.1093/gerona/58.9.M832
  25. Song, C. S. (2013). A reliability the montreal cognitive assessment on cognitive impairment following stroke, Korea Academia-industrial Cooperation Society, 14, 1228-1233. doi:10.5762/KAIS.2013.14.3.1228
  26. Stalvey, B. T., & Owsley, C. (2003). The development and efficacy of a theory-based educational curriculum to promote self regulation among high-risk older derives. Health Promotion Practice, 4, 109-119. doi:10.1177/1524839902250757
  27. Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173-180. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4
  28. Sullman, M. J. M., Meadows, M. L., & Pajo, K. B. (2002). Aberrant driving behaviours amongst New Zealand truck drivers. Transportation Research Par F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 5, 217-232. doi:10.1016/S1369-8478(02)00019-0
  29. Wang, C. C., & Carr, D. B. (2004). Older driver safety: A report from the older drivers project. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 52(1), 143-149. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2004.52025.x
  30. World Health Organization. (2012). Process of translation and adaptation of instruments. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/translation/en/

Cited by

  1. Comparing Effects of Driving Simulator and Dynavision Training on Cognitive Ability and Driving Performance After Stroke vol.26, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.14519/jksot.2018.26.4.10
  2. Validity of the Self-report Assessment Forecasting Elderly Driving Risk (SAFE-DR) Applicable to Community Health Convergence vol.9, pp.6, 2018, https://doi.org/10.22156/cs4smb.2019.9.6.175
  3. Psychometric Characteristics for Clinical Application of Korean Version of Adelaide Driving Self Efficacy Scale vol.27, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.14519/kjot.2019.27.4.10
  4. Development of an Android-Based Self-Report Assessment for Elderly Driving Risk (SAFE-DR) App: Mixed Methods Study vol.9, pp.6, 2018, https://doi.org/10.2196/25310