Prasad R S, Hunter J, Hanley J
Scottish Driving Assessment Service, Rehabilitation Medicine Directorate, Astley Ainslie Hospital, Grange Loan, Edinburgh, UK.
Clin Rehabil. 2006 May;20(5):445-50. doi: 10.1191/0269215506cr957oa.
To study the influence of non-standard controls on return to driving after disability, including prevalence of accidents/retraining difficulties.
Postal questionnaires sent within two years of assessment to 972 disabled drivers seen over a three-year period.
Scottish Driving Assessment Service.
All patients considered capable of driving after assessment during the study period.
Five hundred and eighty-nine people (61 %) replied who were representative of the total population (mean age 55 years, range 19-87); 73% were male and 70% were disabled for up to two years. Overall 79% respondents had returned to driving (highest reported success with standard manual car (86%) and lowest using left foot to accelerate and brake (66%) (chi2 = 16.6, P = 0.005)). A significantly higher proportion of the 30 patients (6.5%) admitting to accidents and 25 (5.4%) to problems with retraining were using non-standard driving techniques, especially the use of hand controls.
Disabled drivers returning to drive using non-familiar controls had lower success and a higher proportion of accidents and/or problems with retraining than people using conventional controls. If confirmed in larger studies this may have implications for policy-makers as well as specialist practitioners.
研究非标准控制对残疾后恢复驾驶的影响，包括事故发生率/再培训困难情况。
在评估后的两年内，向三年期间见过的972名残疾驾驶员发送邮政问卷。
苏格兰驾驶评估服务中心。
研究期间所有经评估后被认为有能力驾驶的患者。
589人（61%）回复，他们代表了总体人群（平均年龄55岁，范围19 - 87岁）；73%为男性，70%残疾时间长达两年。总体而言，79%的受访者已恢复驾驶（报告成功率最高的是标准手动汽车（86%），使用左脚加速和刹车的成功率最低（66%）（卡方 = 16.6，P = 0.005））。承认发生事故的30名患者（6.5%）和存在再培训问题的25名患者（5.4%）中，使用非标准驾驶技术的比例显著更高，尤其是使用手动控制装置的情况。
与使用传统控制装置的人相比，使用不熟悉控制装置恢复驾驶的残疾驾驶员成功率较低，事故发生率和/或再培训问题的比例更高。如果在更大规模的研究中得到证实，这可能对政策制定者以及专业从业者产生影响。
