Palliative care specialists infrequently discuss driving safety with their patients with cancer when prescribing opioids.

4区 医学 Q2 Nursing
Patricia S Bramati, Daniel Gilbey, Stephen Nkeonye, Alexandra Cooper, Eduardo Bruera
{"title":"Palliative care specialists infrequently discuss driving safety with their patients with cancer when prescribing opioids.","authors":"Patricia S Bramati, Daniel Gilbey, Stephen Nkeonye, Alexandra Cooper, Eduardo Bruera","doi":"10.21037/apm-2026-0050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Opioids may impair the ability to drive especially when prescribed for the first time or when the dose is increased. Because driving is closely associated with independence and quality of life, discussions regarding driving safety should be an integral part of prescribing opioids. However, little is known about the frequency with which palliative care specialists address this issue in clinical practice. In this pilot study, an anonymous survey was conducted among palliative care specialists to evaluate whether driving safety is discussed when prescribing opioids. The survey was distributed to advanced practice providers and physicians from a palliative care service of a tertiary cancer center, and 61 of 72 (85%) completed it. Fifty-seven (93%) respondents considered assessing patients' driving status to be important, and 58 (95%) agreed that driving is an important part of the quality of life of the patients. However, only 28 (46%) reported that they often discuss driving safety in general, and responses were lower when patients were on chronic opioids: 24 (39%) when the morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) was ≥100 mg whereas only 13 (21%) did so when the MEDD was ≤50 mg. In addition, just 20 (33%) frequently discuss driving safety when the dose is increased, and only 13 (21%) were familiar with local driving regulations regarding opioid prescribing. Despite recognizing the importance of driving safety, palliative care specialists infrequently address driving safety and opioids with their patients. Educational interventions, increased awareness of local regulations, and standardized preprinted information for patients may improve counseling and promote safer opioid prescribing practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":7956,"journal":{"name":"Annals of palliative medicine","volume":"15 4","pages":"56"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of palliative medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/apm-2026-0050","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Opioids may impair the ability to drive especially when prescribed for the first time or when the dose is increased. Because driving is closely associated with independence and quality of life, discussions regarding driving safety should be an integral part of prescribing opioids. However, little is known about the frequency with which palliative care specialists address this issue in clinical practice. In this pilot study, an anonymous survey was conducted among palliative care specialists to evaluate whether driving safety is discussed when prescribing opioids. The survey was distributed to advanced practice providers and physicians from a palliative care service of a tertiary cancer center, and 61 of 72 (85%) completed it. Fifty-seven (93%) respondents considered assessing patients' driving status to be important, and 58 (95%) agreed that driving is an important part of the quality of life of the patients. However, only 28 (46%) reported that they often discuss driving safety in general, and responses were lower when patients were on chronic opioids: 24 (39%) when the morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) was ≥100 mg whereas only 13 (21%) did so when the MEDD was ≤50 mg. In addition, just 20 (33%) frequently discuss driving safety when the dose is increased, and only 13 (21%) were familiar with local driving regulations regarding opioid prescribing. Despite recognizing the importance of driving safety, palliative care specialists infrequently address driving safety and opioids with their patients. Educational interventions, increased awareness of local regulations, and standardized preprinted information for patients may improve counseling and promote safer opioid prescribing practices.

姑息治疗专家在开阿片类药物处方时很少与癌症患者讨论驾驶安全问题。
阿片类药物可能会损害驾驶能力,特别是第一次开处方或剂量增加时。因为驾驶与独立性和生活质量密切相关,关于驾驶安全的讨论应该是处方阿片类药物的一个组成部分。然而,人们对姑息治疗专家在临床实践中解决这一问题的频率知之甚少。在这项初步研究中,在姑息治疗专家中进行了一项匿名调查,以评估在开阿片类药物处方时是否讨论了驾驶安全。该调查被分发给三级癌症中心姑息治疗服务的高级实践提供者和医生,72人中有61人(85%)完成了调查。57名(93%)受访者认为评估患者的驾驶状态很重要,58名(95%)受访者认为驾驶是患者生活质量的重要组成部分。然而,只有28人(46%)报告说他们经常讨论驾驶安全问题,当患者服用慢性阿片类药物时,反应较低:24人(39%)当吗啡当量日剂量(MEDD)≥100 mg时,而只有13人(21%)在MEDD≤50 mg时这样做。此外,只有20人(33%)在剂量增加时经常讨论驾驶安全,只有13人(21%)熟悉有关阿片类药物处方的当地驾驶法规。尽管认识到驾驶安全的重要性,姑息治疗专家很少与患者讨论驾驶安全和阿片类药物问题。教育干预、提高对地方法规的认识以及标准化的预先打印的患者信息可能会改善咨询并促进更安全的阿片类药物处方做法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annals of palliative medicine
Annals of palliative medicine Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
自引率
0.00%
发文量
231
期刊介绍: Annals of Palliative Medicine (Ann Palliat Med; Print ISSN 2224-5820; Online ISSN 2224-5839) is an open access, international, peer-reviewed journal published quarterly with both online and printed copies since 2012. The aim of the journal is to provide up-to-date and cutting-edge information and professional support for health care providers in palliative medicine disciplines to improve the quality of life for patients and their families and caregivers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书