ArticleCureus2026
Driving Advice Documentation in Patient Notes and Discharge Summaries in Cardiology Patients.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Cardiac conditions can cause sudden symptoms that may impact driving, so the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) imposes restrictions on affected patients or those who have had cardiac procedures. Even though patients must inform DVLA, it is the doctors who are responsible for advising patients about these restrictions. Clinical practice experience and previously published reports show that driving advice was often missing from patient notes and discharge summaries. The quality improvement project (QIP) checked these records to see whether driving advice was documented. Methods A QIP using the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle was conducted with the aim of assessing the documentation of driving advice in cardiology patients' records and discharge summaries and evaluating whether targeted educational interventions could improve documentation rates. Records from September to December 2025 were retrospectively reviewed, including only patients who reported driving at the time of admission. Following the audit, an educational intervention and a discharge flowchart poster with a QR code linking to the latest DVLA guidance were introduced. The data audit cycle was repeated three times after the initial review, with ongoing educational interventions. Results Initially, 19/33 (57.6%) discharge summaries and 15/33 (45.5%) patient notes included driving restriction advice. After educational interventions, this increased to 15/21 (71.4%) discharge summaries and 11/21 (52.4%) patient notes. Documentation declined after some junior doctors changed, with the second cycle at 14/23 (60.9%) for discharge summaries and 13/23 (56.5%) for patient notes. A repeat of educational interventions led to marked improvement, reaching 24/27 (88.9%) for discharge summaries and 19/27 (74.4%) for patient notes. Conclusions Educational interventions are valuable, but regular reminders should be included, such as discussing driving advice during departmental orientation for new junior doctors. Patients can be engaged by placing posters that prompt them to ask doctors about driving guidance. Additionally, a QIP is recommended to assess the accuracy of driving advice compared with DVLA guidelines.
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.