Helena Burger1, Crt Marincek. 1. University Rehabilitation Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia. helena.burger@ir-rs.si
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the existing literature, there is scarce information about subjects with upper limb amputation and driving. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to find out how frequently subjects following upper limb amputation have problems when driving; most frequently proposed adaptations and, when possible, factors that influence driving ability. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective clinical study. METHODS: Medical records were reviewed of all subjects following upper limb amputation who had been amputated in the last 5 years and those with congenital upper limb deficiency who in the last 5 years turned 17. RESULTS: Out of 37 subjects, 7 did not attend the clinic for assessment of driving abilities. They were significantly older at the time of the amputation (p < 0.001). To the remaining 30 who attended driving assessment, zero to four car adaptations (two on average) were proposed. There were no correlations between the number of suggested car adaptations and the age at the time of the amputation, amputation level, education and severity of phantom limb pain. Type of prosthesis also did not influence the number of car adaptations. CONCLUSIONS: Most people following upper limb amputation need at least one car adaptation for safe driving.
BACKGROUND: In the existing literature, there is scarce information about subjects with upper limb amputation and driving. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to find out how frequently subjects following upper limb amputation have problems when driving; most frequently proposed adaptations and, when possible, factors that influence driving ability. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective clinical study. METHODS: Medical records were reviewed of all subjects following upper limb amputation who had been amputated in the last 5 years and those with congenital upper limb deficiency who in the last 5 years turned 17. RESULTS: Out of 37 subjects, 7 did not attend the clinic for assessment of driving abilities. They were significantly older at the time of the amputation (p < 0.001). To the remaining 30 who attended driving assessment, zero to four car adaptations (two on average) were proposed. There were no correlations between the number of suggested car adaptations and the age at the time of the amputation, amputation level, education and severity of phantom limb pain. Type of prosthesis also did not influence the number of car adaptations. CONCLUSIONS: Most people following upper limb amputation need at least one car adaptation for safe driving.