Do Emergency Physicians Educate Patients about the Dangers of Drinking and Driving after a Motor Vehicle Collision, and What Are the Barriers or Motivators to Do So?.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ABSTRACT Introduction: Impaired driving is the leading cause of criminal death in Canada and results in numerous emergency department (ED) visits each year. Methods: An online survey was distributed to 94 emergency physicians and emergency medicine residents at an academic tertiary care hospital in Southwestern Ontario. Descriptive statistics were calculated. Results: We received 76 responses (81% response rate). Physicians widely varied in the frequency with which they discussed the dangers of drinking and driving with patients. Only 13% had consulted the ED social worker and 32%> had used an alcohol screening questionnaire in the past 12 months. The greatest barriers to addressing drinking and driving with motor vehicle collision (MVC) patients were severity of injury, lack of time and intoxication. The great motivators were a sense of personal responsibility, concern for patients ' health and safety and having the time. Conclusion: The information from this survey brings awareness to the longstanding problem of drinking and driving, explores the barriers and motivators to addressing this topic in the ED, and can be used to develop new strategies to educate trauma patients on the dangers of impaired driving. INTRODUCTION Impaired driving is the leading cause of criminal death in Canada (Stats Can 2011) and results in thousands of emergency department (ED) visits each year. Over 700 Canadians are killed by a drinking driver each year, and nearly 28% of all road traffic fatalities involve alcohol. (Vanlaar, Robertson, Marcoux, et al, 2012) In Ontario alone, more than 5,000 crashes resulted in personal injury or property damage after drivers had consumed alcohol in 2012. (Ontario Road Safety annual Report, 2012) Impaired driving leading to death, injury and property damage costs Canadians $20 billion dollars annually. (Pitel, Soloman, 2010) Physician advice has been well-demonstrated to have a positive effect on health behaviours. A 2013 Cochrane review on smoking cessation found that brief physician advice doubled the quit rate from an unassisted quit rate of 2 to 3% by an additional 1 to 3%. (Stead, Buitrago, Preciado, et al, 2013) In relation to alcohol consumption, brief motivational interviewing (BMI) has been shown to delay impaired driving and other dangerous traffic violations in young recidivists. (Ouimet, Dongier, Di Leo, et al, 2013) Evidence exists for the use of BMI for alcohol in both primary care (Nilssen, 2004; Kaner, et al, 2007; Solberg, et al, 2008) and inpatient trauma settings (Gentilello, Ebel, Wickizer, et al, 2005) to effectively reduce alcohol consumption and injury recurrence. (Gentilello, Rivara, Donovan, et al, 1999) Emergency physicians have a unique opportunity to educate patients on health behaviours after life-threatening events, when they are more receptive to advice and ready to change. Emergency department based brief interventions to reduce risky driving and hazardous drinking have demonstrated effectiveness. (Sommers, Lyons, Fargo, et al, 2013) In a study by Harrison et al., trauma patients who had exceeded drinking limits were more likely than other ED patients to have a strong desire to cut back on alcohol consumption in order to avoid situations where they could get hurt and to be more in control of their behaviour. (Harrison, Hoonpongsimanont, Anderson, et al, 2014) This, in combination with emergency physician support for a brief ED intervention (Graham, Maio, Blow, et al, 2000), suggests doctors could be doing more to capitalize on a teachable moment in the ED. We sought to describe our hospital practice as it pertains to educating alcohol-impaired drivers in the ED, in order to identify areas for improvement, as well as barriers and motivators for brief alcohol interventions by emergency physicians. METHODS An online survey was developed and pre-tested with surgical residents, and then distributed to all 63 adult emergency physicians and 31 emergency medicine residents at London Health Sciences Centre (LHSC). …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,014 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».