Tidsskrift for den Norske laegeforening : tidsskrift for praktisk medicin, ny raekke · 2004
[Disagreement about epilepsy and driving].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Brodtkorb Eylert, Bråthen Geir, Bovim Gunnar, Helde Grethe
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To find out how current regulations concerning epilepsy and driving licence are applied in clinical practice in Norway.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to all 344 members of the Norwegian Neurological Association.
RESULTS: 56% responded within 3 months, most of them (152) working in the field of clinical neurology. The majority (73%) did not see reporting a "situation-related" seizure to the authorities as obligatory, but almost all of these respondents (94%) would temporarily disallow driving. 60% did not consider it obligatory to report the exclusive occurrence of simple partial seizures with retained consciousness and motor control. A surprisingly large number (36%) would never recommend dispensation from the rule instituting a one-year driving ban. 39% generally used EEG in the assessment of driving fitness, whereas 17 % rarely did so. Only 50% instructed their patients not to drive during antiepileptic drug withdrawal. 45% did not consider seizure recurrence resulting from consented withdrawal to activate the obligation to report.
CONCLUSION: There is poor consensus among neurologists on many aspects of driving and epilepsy, particularly on the assessment of risk when drugs are withdrawn. These issues should be focused on in graduate and postgraduate education in clinical neurology.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to all 344 members of the Norwegian Neurological Association.
RESULTS: 56% responded within 3 months, most of them (152) working in the field of clinical neurology. The majority (73%) did not see reporting a "situation-related" seizure to the authorities as obligatory, but almost all of these respondents (94%) would temporarily disallow driving. 60% did not consider it obligatory to report the exclusive occurrence of simple partial seizures with retained consciousness and motor control. A surprisingly large number (36%) would never recommend dispensation from the rule instituting a one-year driving ban. 39% generally used EEG in the assessment of driving fitness, whereas 17 % rarely did so. Only 50% instructed their patients not to drive during antiepileptic drug withdrawal. 45% did not consider seizure recurrence resulting from consented withdrawal to activate the obligation to report.
CONCLUSION: There is poor consensus among neurologists on many aspects of driving and epilepsy, particularly on the assessment of risk when drugs are withdrawn. These issues should be focused on in graduate and postgraduate education in clinical neurology.