Cargando…
Glaucoma and Driving License: How to Identify Patients at Risk of Revocation
AIM: To identify clinical criteria that are easily achievable with follow-up tests and can identify subjects not suitable for driving. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We recruited 194 subjects with a clear diagnosis of glaucoma, with no other conditions that could affect the visual field (VF), and who perform...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9452703/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36128076 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10078-1379 |
_version_ | 1784784968850866176 |
---|---|
author | Landini, Luca Donati, Simone Digiuni, Maurizio Feltre, Sara Corsini, Gabriele Premi, Elias Radice, Paolo Azzolini, Claudio |
author_facet | Landini, Luca Donati, Simone Digiuni, Maurizio Feltre, Sara Corsini, Gabriele Premi, Elias Radice, Paolo Azzolini, Claudio |
author_sort | Landini, Luca |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIM: To identify clinical criteria that are easily achievable with follow-up tests and can identify subjects not suitable for driving. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We recruited 194 subjects with a clear diagnosis of glaucoma, with no other conditions that could affect the visual field (VF), and who performed a reliable VF examination. All patients underwent a full ophthalmologic evaluation and a questionnaire considering driving habits. An integrated visual field (IVF) was built using both monocular VF charts; the number of missed points (NoMP) within the central 20°, the average sensitivity (AS), and the better eye mean deviation (BEMD) were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 128 subjects showed a valid driving license (DL); 61.7% of drivers did not show missed points within the central 20° of the IVF, 27.4% presented one to three missed points, and 10.9% had four or more missed points. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was highly above the legal criteria. Stratifying drivers by their BEMD (−7, −10, and −14 dB), we confirmed that the BEMD decrease corresponds to an increased NoMP and a decreased AS. CONCLUSION: Better eye mean deviation can be useful in clinical practice to identify patients at increased risk of being unsuitable for driving. Nevertheless, it is important to set specific cut-offs based on on-road driving performance. IVF evaluation may also be implemented in perimeter analysis software so that the composition of IVF, the BEMD, and the AS could directly describe the patient's binocular VF, excluding recourse to the Esterman visual field test (EVFT). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This new methodology will allow every physician—not just ophthalmologists—even if not an expert in evaluating a VF test, in assessing the ability to drive of glaucomatous patients. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Landini L, Donati S, Digiuni M, et al. Glaucoma and Driving License: How to Identify Patients at Risk of Revocation. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 2022;16(2):117-123. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9452703 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94527032022-09-19 Glaucoma and Driving License: How to Identify Patients at Risk of Revocation Landini, Luca Donati, Simone Digiuni, Maurizio Feltre, Sara Corsini, Gabriele Premi, Elias Radice, Paolo Azzolini, Claudio J Curr Glaucoma Pract Original Research AIM: To identify clinical criteria that are easily achievable with follow-up tests and can identify subjects not suitable for driving. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We recruited 194 subjects with a clear diagnosis of glaucoma, with no other conditions that could affect the visual field (VF), and who performed a reliable VF examination. All patients underwent a full ophthalmologic evaluation and a questionnaire considering driving habits. An integrated visual field (IVF) was built using both monocular VF charts; the number of missed points (NoMP) within the central 20°, the average sensitivity (AS), and the better eye mean deviation (BEMD) were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 128 subjects showed a valid driving license (DL); 61.7% of drivers did not show missed points within the central 20° of the IVF, 27.4% presented one to three missed points, and 10.9% had four or more missed points. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was highly above the legal criteria. Stratifying drivers by their BEMD (−7, −10, and −14 dB), we confirmed that the BEMD decrease corresponds to an increased NoMP and a decreased AS. CONCLUSION: Better eye mean deviation can be useful in clinical practice to identify patients at increased risk of being unsuitable for driving. Nevertheless, it is important to set specific cut-offs based on on-road driving performance. IVF evaluation may also be implemented in perimeter analysis software so that the composition of IVF, the BEMD, and the AS could directly describe the patient's binocular VF, excluding recourse to the Esterman visual field test (EVFT). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This new methodology will allow every physician—not just ophthalmologists—even if not an expert in evaluating a VF test, in assessing the ability to drive of glaucomatous patients. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Landini L, Donati S, Digiuni M, et al. Glaucoma and Driving License: How to Identify Patients at Risk of Revocation. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 2022;16(2):117-123. Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9452703/ /pubmed/36128076 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10078-1379 Text en Copyright © 2022; The Author(s). https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/© The Author(s). 2022 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and non-commercial reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Landini, Luca Donati, Simone Digiuni, Maurizio Feltre, Sara Corsini, Gabriele Premi, Elias Radice, Paolo Azzolini, Claudio Glaucoma and Driving License: How to Identify Patients at Risk of Revocation |
title | Glaucoma and Driving License: How to Identify Patients at Risk of Revocation |
title_full | Glaucoma and Driving License: How to Identify Patients at Risk of Revocation |
title_fullStr | Glaucoma and Driving License: How to Identify Patients at Risk of Revocation |
title_full_unstemmed | Glaucoma and Driving License: How to Identify Patients at Risk of Revocation |
title_short | Glaucoma and Driving License: How to Identify Patients at Risk of Revocation |
title_sort | glaucoma and driving license: how to identify patients at risk of revocation |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9452703/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36128076 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10078-1379 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT landiniluca glaucomaanddrivinglicensehowtoidentifypatientsatriskofrevocation AT donatisimone glaucomaanddrivinglicensehowtoidentifypatientsatriskofrevocation AT digiunimaurizio glaucomaanddrivinglicensehowtoidentifypatientsatriskofrevocation AT feltresara glaucomaanddrivinglicensehowtoidentifypatientsatriskofrevocation AT corsinigabriele glaucomaanddrivinglicensehowtoidentifypatientsatriskofrevocation AT premielias glaucomaanddrivinglicensehowtoidentifypatientsatriskofrevocation AT radicepaolo glaucomaanddrivinglicensehowtoidentifypatientsatriskofrevocation AT azzoliniclaudio glaucomaanddrivinglicensehowtoidentifypatientsatriskofrevocation |