Egli M, Hartmann H, Hess R
Schweiz Med Wochenschr. 1977 Mar 26;107(12):379-97.
The question whether a person with epilepsy qualified for a driving licence must be examined from the point of view of the individual as well as that of the community. The general public should be protected against unduly high risks from epileptic drivers, whereas the patient has a right to live as normal a life as possible, which includes driving an automobile. Too rigid criteria for obtaining the license increase the number of persons who evade medical control and drive "illegally". To require physicians to report their epileptic patients to the authorities would be counterproductive; it would also destroy the personal confidence between physician and patient which is so essential for successful treatment. Epileptic persons endanger safety on the road only slightly: 0.1-0.3% of all traffic accidents are due to epileptic seizures. In contrast, abuse of alcohol plays a major role in 6-9% of all accidents, whereas 80-90% are attributable to evident mistakes by the driver. Epileptic patients under regular medical supervision who are licenced on grounds of approved criteria do not cause more accidents than the general population. A dangerous group are, however, those with mental alterations (organic or reactive) and particularly patients with aggressive and expansive-compensatory traits, as well as those driving without permission. Prognostic criteria as to the further course of the disease are paramount for the assessment of qualification for the licence. The following rules have proved their worth: 2 years freedom from seizures (with or without therapy), no abnormalities specific for epilepsy in the EEG, no serious mental changes, regular medical supervision and treatment mus be guaranteed. Departures from these rules should be confined to exceptional cases with the consent of a physician specialized in epileptology. The same holds for admission to higher categories of driving licence, the only practical eventuality being category D (lorries), and even this only in rare cases. It will scarcely ever be possibel to licence a person who has at some time had epilepsy for professional passanger transportation. The attitude of the physician who first sees the seizure patient is often decisive. It is important that he recognizes the problem, objectively informs his patient and from the very outset gives him realistic advice in order to avoid false decisions, particularly regarding his professional career.
癫痫患者是否具备获得驾照的资格这一问题,必须从个人以及社会的角度进行审视。应保护普通大众免受癫痫患者驾车带来的过高风险,而患者有权尽可能正常地生活,这其中包括驾驶汽车。获取驾照的标准过于严格会增加逃避医疗监管并“非法”驾车的人数。要求医生向当局报告其癫痫患者会适得其反;这还会破坏医患之间对成功治疗至关重要的信任关系。癫痫患者对道路安全的危害极小:所有交通事故中仅有0.1 - 0.3% 是由癫痫发作导致的。相比之下,6 - 9% 的事故主要是由于酗酒,而80 - 90% 可归因于驾驶员明显的失误。在定期医疗监督下,依据认可标准获得驾照的癫痫患者引发的事故并不比普通人群多。然而,存在危险的群体是那些有精神改变(器质性或反应性)的人,特别是具有攻击性和膨胀 - 补偿性特质的患者,以及未经许可驾车的人。对于疾病后续发展的预后标准对于评估驾照资格至关重要。以下规则已被证明是有价值的:两年无癫痫发作(无论是否接受治疗),脑电图无癫痫特异性异常,无严重精神变化,必须保证定期医疗监督和治疗。偏离这些规则应限于经癫痫学专家同意的特殊情况。对于获得更高等级驾照的情况也是如此,唯一实际可能的是D类(货车),而且这种情况也很少见。曾经患过癫痫的人几乎不可能获得职业客运驾照。首次接诊癫痫患者的医生的态度往往起决定性作用。重要的是他要认识到问题,客观地告知患者,并从一开始就给他提供现实的建议,以避免做出错误决定,特别是关于其职业的决定。