130 March/April 2008, Volume 62, Number 2 Background and Methodology of the Older Driver Evidence-Based Systematic Literature Review KEY WORDS • driving • community mobility • evidence-based review • older adults Wendy B. Stav, PhD, OTR/L, SCDCM, is Assistant Professor, Department of Occupational Therapy and Occupational Science, Towson University, 8000 York Road, Towson, MD 21252; wstav@towson.edu Marian Arbesman, PhD, OTR/L, is President, ArbesIdeas, Inc.; Consultant, AOTA Evidence-Based Literature Review Project; and Clinical Assistant Professor, Department of Rehabilitation Science, School of Public Health and Health Professions, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Williamsville. Deborah Lieberman, MHSA, OTR/L, FAOTA, is Program Director, Evidence-Based Practice, American Occupational Therapy Association, Bethesda, MD. In response to demands of health care and community-based systems, occupational therapy practitioners are eager to provide effective services that are client centered, supported by evidence, and delivered in an efficient and cost-effective manner. Findings from the scientific literature provide a source of legitimacy and authority for informing and guiding practice in all areas, including driving and community mobility with older adults. A systematic review examined studies designed to enhance the driving ability, performance, and safety of older adults. This article presents an overview of the methodology used to develop the focused questions related to the person, vehicle, infrastructure, and policy and community mobility; conduct the literature review; and estab- lish quality control. It includes a summary of the evidence and implications of the review for clinical practice, education, and research to ultimately identify interventions effective in supporting older adult participation and engagement in occupation. Stav, W. B., Arbesman, M., & Lieberman, D. (2008). Background and methodology of the Older Driver Evidence-Based Systematic Literature Review. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62, 130–135. Wendy B. Stav, Marian Arbesman, Deborah Lieberman E vidence-based practice (EBP) has been one approach to effective health care deliverysincetheearly1990s.Spurredonbythedemandsofpayers,regulators, andconsumers,occupationaltherapistsandoccupationaltherapyassistantsareeager toprovideeffectiveservicesthatareclientcentered,supportedbyevidence,and deliveredinanefficientandcost-effectivemanner. Atthesametime,manyoccupationaltherapistsandoccupationaltherapyassis- tantsarechallengedtounderstandhowtousethebestavailableevidencetoinform theirpractices.Manypractitionersdidnotacquirecriticalappraisalskillswhilein school;othersacquiredtheskillsbutarestillnotconfidentinthem.Forbothgroups, taking steps to review practice-oriented literature on their own is a challenge. In addition,limitedaccesstoelectronicdatabasesandsystem-levelconstraints,suchas lackoftimeandmanagementsupport,furtherlimittheminsearching,retrieving, andappraisingresearchevidencethatcouldbeusefultotheirpractices. Since 1998, the American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA) has institutedaseriesofEBPprojectstoassistmembersinmeetingthechallengeof findingandreviewingtheliteraturetoidentifyevidenceandthenusingthisevidence to inform practice (Lieberman & Scheer, 2002). Following the evidence-based philosophyofSackett,Rosenberg,Gray,Haynes,andRichardson(1996),AOTA’s projectsareconductedinthebeliefthattheEBPofoccupationaltherapyrelieson theintegrationofinformationfromthreesources:(1)clinicalexperienceandreason- ing,(2)preferencesofclientsandtheirfamilies,and(3)findingsfromthemost reliableavailableresearch. ThecenterpieceofAOTA’sEBPprojectsisanongoingprogramofsystematic reviewofmultidisciplinaryscientificliterature,usingfocusedquestionsandstandard- izedprocedurestoidentifypractice-relevantevidenceanddiscussitsimplicationsfor