ArticleEye (London, England)2023
Driving and glaucoma in the UK: a national survey of clinicians' advice and guidance to patients.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comment on: Driving and glaucoma in the UK: a national survey of clinicians' advice and guidance to patients.Eye (London, England) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDriving standards policy is set by the Department for Transport and executed by the Driving and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA). Professional bodies recognise the challenges that clinicians face when advising patients with glaucoma about driving. This study explored clinicians' knowledge and confidence around driving standards and their approach to advising and guiding patients.
methodsCross-sectional online survey of all United Kingdom and Eire Glaucoma Society (UKEGS) members. The survey remained open for five weeks (22/02/21-27/03/21). Anonymised data were exported to Microsoft Excel for analysis.
resultsOut of 91 respondents (minimum response rate 20.2%), 53 (58.2%) were glaucoma consultants, 2 (2.2%) general consultant ophthalmologists, 4 (4.4%) ophthalmology fellows, 5 (5.5%) ophthalmology trainees, 19 (20.9%) optometrists, and 8(8.8%) 'other' categories (one SAS doctor, six specialist doctors, one nurse specialist). 58.2% reported that the visual standards for driving were 'very familiar'; 40.5% were 'moderately familiar'; one(1.2%) was only 'somewhat familiar'; none were completely unfamiliar. A total of 38 (41.8%) respondents were highly confident in giving advice on fitness to drive; 51 (56.0%) were moderately confident; 2 (2.2%) had only limited confidence. Over 25% review patients not meeting driving standards in every glaucoma clinic, over 50% identifying abnormal visual fields as the main reason.
conclusionOur study found that most clinicians are familiar with DVLA driving standards. However, busy clinical environments limit detailed discussion about this, leading to only one in four clinicians being very confident to broach the subject with patients in clinic. A range of patient education modalities were suggested, which may help simplify advice provision for glaucoma patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.