Retrospective quality review of Department of Transportation (DOT) commercial drivers medical examination forms.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH American journal of industrial medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-11 DOI:10.1002/ajim.23661
Maria Starchook-Moore, Ashley Nadeau, Dominik Dabrowski, John Briggs, LaDonna Kool, Mezzie Belt, Ralph Bovard, Paul Anderson, Hyun Kim, Andre Montoya-Barthelemy, Zeke J McKinney
{"title":"Retrospective quality review of Department of Transportation (DOT) commercial drivers medical examination forms.","authors":"Maria Starchook-Moore, Ashley Nadeau, Dominik Dabrowski, John Briggs, LaDonna Kool, Mezzie Belt, Ralph Bovard, Paul Anderson, Hyun Kim, Andre Montoya-Barthelemy, Zeke J McKinney","doi":"10.1002/ajim.23661","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the quality of completion among both drivers and medical examiners in filling out Commercial Driver's (CD) Medical Examination Report Forms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a cross-sectional retrospective study of abstracted data from the year 2019. CD Medical Examination Report Forms, collected from a single nationally-based employer and initially reviewed by corporate medical directors, were evaluated by the study team for completeness of documentation provided by both drivers and medical examiners (MEs). Relevant findings included unanswered questions, inconsistency between responses, and lack of necessary elaboration for positive responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 1603 examinations, MEs completed the Medical Examination Report Form incompletely or incorrectly in 30% of examinations (n = 484). Drivers inconsistently filled out their health history with elaborations 38.7% of the time. Most commonly, they failed to elaborate on positive health history responses in 28.7% of examinations, but other types of errors were noted as well.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A considerable proportion of drivers or examiners (n = 890, 55%) failed to adequately or correctly complete CD Medical Examination Report forms.</p>","PeriodicalId":7873,"journal":{"name":"American journal of industrial medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of industrial medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.23661","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the quality of completion among both drivers and medical examiners in filling out Commercial Driver's (CD) Medical Examination Report Forms.

Methods: This was a cross-sectional retrospective study of abstracted data from the year 2019. CD Medical Examination Report Forms, collected from a single nationally-based employer and initially reviewed by corporate medical directors, were evaluated by the study team for completeness of documentation provided by both drivers and medical examiners (MEs). Relevant findings included unanswered questions, inconsistency between responses, and lack of necessary elaboration for positive responses.

Results: Among 1603 examinations, MEs completed the Medical Examination Report Form incompletely or incorrectly in 30% of examinations (n = 484). Drivers inconsistently filled out their health history with elaborations 38.7% of the time. Most commonly, they failed to elaborate on positive health history responses in 28.7% of examinations, but other types of errors were noted as well.

Conclusions: A considerable proportion of drivers or examiners (n = 890, 55%) failed to adequately or correctly complete CD Medical Examination Report forms.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对美国交通部 (DOT) 商业驾驶员体检表的质量进行回顾性审查。
目的: 本研究旨在评估驾驶员和体检人员填写商业驾驶员体检报告表的质量:本研究旨在评估驾驶员和体检人员填写商业驾驶员(CD)体检报告表的质量:这是一项横断面回顾性研究,研究对象为 2019 年的抽取数据。CD 体检报告表从一家全国性雇主处收集,由公司医务总监进行初步审核,研究小组对驾驶员和体检人员(ME)提供的文件的完整性进行了评估。相关结果包括:未回答的问题、回答不一致以及对肯定回答缺乏必要的阐述:在 1603 次体检中,有 30% 的体检者(n = 484)填写的体检报告表不完整或不正确。有 38.7% 的司机在填写健康史时前后矛盾。最常见的是,在28.7%的体检中,他们没有详细说明正面的健康史回答,但也发现了其他类型的错误:相当一部分驾驶员或体检人员(n = 890,55%)未能充分或正确填写 CD 体检报告表。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
American journal of industrial medicine
American journal of industrial medicine 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
5.70%
发文量
108
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: American Journal of Industrial Medicine considers for publication reports of original research, review articles, instructive case reports, and analyses of policy in the fields of occupational and environmental health and safety. The Journal also accepts commentaries, book reviews and letters of comment and criticism. The goals of the journal are to advance and disseminate knowledge, promote research and foster the prevention of disease and injury. Specific topics of interest include: occupational disease; environmental disease; pesticides; cancer; occupational epidemiology; environmental epidemiology; disease surveillance systems; ergonomics; dust diseases; lead poisoning; neurotoxicology; endocrine disruptors.
期刊最新文献
A longitudinal pre-post study: An evaluation of the Department of the Air Force bundled occupational fall prevention efforts. Issue Information Essential(ly forgotten) workers: Latine youth farmworkers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Surveillance of asbestos related disease among workers enrolled in an exposure registry. Prevalence of COVID-19 and Long COVID by industry and occupation: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System 2022.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1