Suppr超能文献

针对医学上存在风险的老年驾驶员干预措施的循证综述。

Evidence-based review of interventions for medically at-risk older drivers.

作者信息

Classen Sherrilene, Monahan Miriam, Auten Beth, Yarney Abraham

机构信息

Sherrilene Classen, PhD, MPH, OTR/L, is Adjunct Professor, Institute for Mobility, Activity and Participation, College of Public Health and Health Professions, University of Florida, Gainesville, and Professor and Chair, School of Occupational Therapy, Western University, Elborn College, 1201 Western Road, London, Ontario, Canada N6G 1H1;

Miriam Monahan, MS, OTR/L, CDRS, is Visiting Scholar, Institute for Mobility, Activity and Participation, College of Public Health and Health Professions, Department of Occupational Therapy, University of Florida, Gainesville.

出版信息

Am J Occup Ther. 2014 Jul-Aug;68(4):e107-14. doi: 10.5014/ajot.2014.010975.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. To conduct an evidence-based review of intervention studies of older drivers with medical conditions. METHOD. We used the American Occupational Therapy Association's classification criteria (Levels I-V, I = highest level of evidence) to identify driving interventions. We classified studies using letters to represent the strength of recommendations: A = strongly recommend the intervention; B = recommend intervention is provided routinely; C = weak evidence that the intervention can improve outcomes; D = recommend not to provide the intervention; I = insufficient evidence to recommend for or against the intervention. RESULTS. For clients with stroke, we recommend a graded simulator intervention (A) and multimodal training in traffic theory knowledge and on-road interventions (B); we make no recommendation for or against Dynavision, Useful Field of View, or visual-perceptual interventions (I). For clients with visual deficits, we recommend educational intervention (A) and bioptic training (B); we make no recommendation for or against prism lenses (I). For clients with dementia, we recommend driving restriction interventions (C) and make no recommendation for or against use of compensatory driving strategies (I). CONCLUSION. Level I studies are needed to identify effective interventions for medically at-risk older drivers.

摘要

目的。对患有疾病的老年驾驶员干预研究进行循证综述。方法。我们使用美国职业治疗协会的分类标准(I - V级,I级 = 最高证据级别)来确定驾驶干预措施。我们用字母对研究进行分类以代表推荐强度:A = 强烈推荐该干预措施;B = 推荐常规提供干预措施;C = 干预措施可改善结局的证据不足;D = 推荐不提供该干预措施;I = 没有足够证据支持或反对该干预措施。结果。对于中风患者,我们推荐分级模拟器干预(A)以及交通理论知识和道路干预方面的多模式训练(B);对于动态视力训练、有用视野训练或视觉感知干预,我们不做推荐(I)。对于视力缺陷患者,我们推荐教育干预(A)和双眼视觉训练(B);对于棱镜镜片,我们不做推荐(I)。对于痴呆患者,我们推荐驾驶限制干预(C),对于使用代偿性驾驶策略,我们不做推荐(I)。结论。需要开展I级研究以确定对有医学风险的老年驾驶员有效的干预措施。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验