HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

Rapid Response to:

Original Articles: Hillary R. Bogner, Joseph B. Straton, Joseph J. Gallo, George W. Rebok, and Penelope M. Keyl The Role of Physicians in Assessing Older Drivers: Barriers, Opportunities, and Strategies J Am Board Fam Pract 2004; 17: 38-43 [Abstract] [Full text] [PDF]

Rapid Response: Submit a response to this article

Responses published:

Office based approaches to measure competent driving

Ediriweera B.R., Desapriya, Dr. Ian Pike   (22 June 2005)

Office based approaches to measure competent driving 22 June 2005
Ediriweera B.R., Desapriya, Research Associate Department of Pediatrics,BC Injury Research and Prevention- University of British Columbia-V6H 3V4, Dr. Ian Pike Send response to journal: Re: Office based approaches to measure competent driving edesap{at}cw.bc.ca Ediriweera B.R., Desapriya, et al.	One recent study has reviewed opinion-based approaches and current attempts to promote evidence-based strategies on health-related and medical aspects of fitness to drive. More than 1500 papers were reviewed to find practical approaches to, or guidelines for, assessing medical fitness to drive in primary care. Only level III evidence was found. No evidence-based approaches were found. In this review the authors were discussed 3 practical methods of assessments: (1) American Medical Association guidelines (2) SAFE DRIVE, and (3)CanDRIVE. They found that there was no evidence-based information to help physicians make decisions regarding medical fitness to drive. Current approaches are primarily opinion-based and are of unknown predictive value. They conclude that research initiatives, such as the CanDRIVE program of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), can provide empiric data that would allow physicians to move from opinion to evidence. Reference: Molnar F.J., Byszewski A.M., Marshall S.C., Man-Son-Hing M., In-office evaluation of medical fitness to drive: practical approaches for assessing older people. Can Fam Physician 2005; 51 327-8