Cited by 71Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasCardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsCardiac Health and Mental Health

Recurrent Cardiac Events in Survivors of Ventricular Fibrillation or Tachycardia: Implications for Driving Restrictions

Larsen, Greg C.·1994·JAMA

Abstract

Objective To determine when survivors of ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) might most safely return to driving. Design Consecutive case series of 501 VT and VF survivors discharged alive between August 1978 and October 1989 and followed from 0 to 117 months (mean, 26 months). Setting Cardiac arrhythmia service of a university hospital. Patients The study group comprised 290 consecutive patients with sustained VT and 211 patients with VF who underwent electrophysiological studies and were discharged alive (78% male; mean age, 59 years). The mean ejection fraction (available in 338 patients) was 0.42. Interventions Antiarrhythmic drug testing for all patients was guided by serial electrophysiological testing. Overall, 227 patients (45%) were discharged on conventional antiarrhythmic agents, 115 (23%) on amiodarone, 39 (8%) received an implantable defibrillator, and 120 (24%) received no specific antiarrhythmic therapy. Main outcome measures Main outcomes included any event that could hamper a patient's ability to operate a motor vehicle. Specifically, these events included recurrent VF, poorly tolerated, hemodynamically unstable VT, syncope, sudden cardiac death, and implantable defibrillator discharge. Results Event risks were assessed during the first year after hospital discharge because that is when most patients decide whether to begin driving again. The 1-year outcome event rate for all 501 patients was 17%. Three distinct periods of risk were…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.1994.03510410047031

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Society recognizes that certain groups, such as younger and older adults, are allowed to drive despite their higher risk of causing harm for reasons other than syncope.

    “Society recognizes that certain groups, such as younger and older adults, are allowed to drive despite their higher risk of causing harm for reasons other than syncope (693).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Larsen, G. C.
Corresponding author
Larsen, Greg C.
Venue
JAMA
Published
1994-05-04
Volume
271
Issue
17
Pages
1335
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2015578926
Cited by
71
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 3
FWCI
3.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
Keywords
ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation, return to driving, driving restrictions, recurrent cardiac events, sudden cardiac death, syncope, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, antiarrhythmic drugs, amiodarone, electrophysiological study, post-discharge risk, hazard function, vehicle safety, ejection fraction
MeSH terms
Accidents, Traffic, Automobile Driving, Electrophysiology, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Recurrence, Risk, Tachycardia, Ventricular Fibrillation, Proportional Hazards Models, Defibrillators, Implantable

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review