Citation

Sindwani R, Parnes LS. J. Otolaryngol. 1997; 26(2): 104-111.

Affiliation

Department of Otolaryngology, University of Western Ontario, London.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1997, B C Decker)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

9106085

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were (1) to learn about the concerns and current practices of Canadian otolaryngologists with regard to the reporting of vestibular patients; and (2) to examine the three different reporting mandates in Canada by surveying otolaryngologists in Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia, and to assess the level of satisfaction with reporting methods. METHOD: A survey was mailed to all members of the Canadian Society of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery in Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia, using a modified version of the "Dillman Total Survey Design Method." RESULTS: The survey had an overall response rate of 62.8%. Although many respondents have considered reporting vestibular patients (82.2%) and have warned patients not to drive without reporting them (84.2%), only 25.3% actually have. The great majority (91.8%) felt that unfit drivers should be brought to the attention of the transportation authority. There was no consensus of opinion on the best method of reporting, but only 23.3% of those surveyed supported mandatory physician reporting. Ontario otolaryngologists were significantly less satisfied with the fitness-to-drive legislation in their province than were those from Alberta or British Columbia (chi 2 = 22.7, p = .001). Almost three times as many Ontario respondents have actually reported a vestibular patient (chi 2 = 6.7, p = .01). CONCLUSIONS: The study results suggest that mandatory physician reporting is not a satisfactory method of reporting unfit-to-drive vestibular patients. It is highly recommended that all physicians become familiar with the reporting guidelines in their province or territory and comply with their legal obligations.