确定适合驾驶的司机与痴呆症:一个医生的观点

Joanne M. Bennett, E. Chekaluk, J. Batchelor
{"title":"确定适合驾驶的司机与痴呆症:一个医生的观点","authors":"Joanne M. Bennett, E. Chekaluk, J. Batchelor","doi":"10.33492/JACRS-D-18-00276","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Currently in Australia medical fitness to drive decisions for people with dementia are largely conducted by front line medical practitioners. Little is known about the processes that these practitioners use to make these decisions, and how current guidelines assist in making determinations about driving capacity. A short survey was completed by 42 practitioners. The results of the survey supported previous findings that practitioners do not feel comfortable with making the decision regarding fitness to drive for people with dementia. Practitioners relied largely on self-report or informant information regarding current driving practices. Although practitioners reported that the level of cognitive functioning was the most important factor in determining safe driving, only 25% of practitioners employed cognitive assessments. Whilst the vast majority of practitioners were aware of the fitness to drive guidelines, over half did not find them to be sufficient in enabling determinations of driving capacity. Due to this, almost all practitioners reported that they believe they have missed cases of unsafe driving in this population with over 85% endorsing the need for a more objective tool. Significantly, over three quarters of practitioners reported that they have never received training on how to make fitness to drive decisions. Given that the current driver licensing system for people with dementia depends on medical fitness to drive reviews, the lack of confidence by practitioners regarding making fitness to drive decisions can have a detrimental impact on both the safety of the individual drivers, but also the community as a whole.","PeriodicalId":43503,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Australasian College of Road Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Determining Fitness to Drive for Drivers with Dementia: A Medical Practitioner Perspective\",\"authors\":\"Joanne M. Bennett, E. Chekaluk, J. Batchelor\",\"doi\":\"10.33492/JACRS-D-18-00276\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Currently in Australia medical fitness to drive decisions for people with dementia are largely conducted by front line medical practitioners. Little is known about the processes that these practitioners use to make these decisions, and how current guidelines assist in making determinations about driving capacity. A short survey was completed by 42 practitioners. The results of the survey supported previous findings that practitioners do not feel comfortable with making the decision regarding fitness to drive for people with dementia. Practitioners relied largely on self-report or informant information regarding current driving practices. Although practitioners reported that the level of cognitive functioning was the most important factor in determining safe driving, only 25% of practitioners employed cognitive assessments. Whilst the vast majority of practitioners were aware of the fitness to drive guidelines, over half did not find them to be sufficient in enabling determinations of driving capacity. Due to this, almost all practitioners reported that they believe they have missed cases of unsafe driving in this population with over 85% endorsing the need for a more objective tool. Significantly, over three quarters of practitioners reported that they have never received training on how to make fitness to drive decisions. Given that the current driver licensing system for people with dementia depends on medical fitness to drive reviews, the lack of confidence by practitioners regarding making fitness to drive decisions can have a detrimental impact on both the safety of the individual drivers, but also the community as a whole.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43503,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Australasian College of Road Safety\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-05-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Australasian College of Road Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33492/JACRS-D-18-00276\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Australasian College of Road Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33492/JACRS-D-18-00276","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目前,在澳大利亚,推动痴呆症患者决策的医疗健身主要由一线医生进行。对于这些从业者做出这些决定的过程,以及当前的指导方针如何帮助确定驾驶能力,我们知之甚少。42名从业人员完成了一项简短的调查。调查结果支持了之前的发现,即从业者对痴呆症患者是否适合开车的决定感到不舒服。从业者在很大程度上依赖于关于当前驾驶实践的自我报告或线人信息。尽管从业人员报告称,认知功能水平是决定安全驾驶的最重要因素,但只有25%的从业人员采用了认知评估。虽然绝大多数从业者都知道适合驾驶的指南,但超过一半的人认为这些指南不足以确定驾驶能力。因此,几乎所有从业者都报告说,他们认为自己错过了这一人群中不安全驾驶的案例,超过85%的人支持需要一种更客观的工具。值得注意的是,超过四分之三的从业者报告说,他们从未接受过如何进行健身以推动决策的培训。鉴于目前针对痴呆症患者的驾驶执照制度取决于驾驶健康状况的审查,从业者对驾驶健康状况决策缺乏信心,可能会对个别驾驶员的安全以及整个社区产生不利影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Determining Fitness to Drive for Drivers with Dementia: A Medical Practitioner Perspective
Currently in Australia medical fitness to drive decisions for people with dementia are largely conducted by front line medical practitioners. Little is known about the processes that these practitioners use to make these decisions, and how current guidelines assist in making determinations about driving capacity. A short survey was completed by 42 practitioners. The results of the survey supported previous findings that practitioners do not feel comfortable with making the decision regarding fitness to drive for people with dementia. Practitioners relied largely on self-report or informant information regarding current driving practices. Although practitioners reported that the level of cognitive functioning was the most important factor in determining safe driving, only 25% of practitioners employed cognitive assessments. Whilst the vast majority of practitioners were aware of the fitness to drive guidelines, over half did not find them to be sufficient in enabling determinations of driving capacity. Due to this, almost all practitioners reported that they believe they have missed cases of unsafe driving in this population with over 85% endorsing the need for a more objective tool. Significantly, over three quarters of practitioners reported that they have never received training on how to make fitness to drive decisions. Given that the current driver licensing system for people with dementia depends on medical fitness to drive reviews, the lack of confidence by practitioners regarding making fitness to drive decisions can have a detrimental impact on both the safety of the individual drivers, but also the community as a whole.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
期刊最新文献
Selected Bibliography Frontmatter Acknowledgments The relative efficacy of positively and negatively valenced road safety campaign messages in improving dangerous driving attitudes Community participation in road safety policy development and strategy planning
×
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