Four scientific societies, drawing attention to teh recent changes to article 187 of the new Highway Code approved by the Senate on 20 November, offer their technical-scientific expertise for the definition of balanced request regulations that protect both road safety and human rights. of patients. They are the Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care (Siaarti), the Italian Association for the Study of Pain (Aisd), the Italian Society of Dependent Pathologies (Sipad) and the Italian Society of General Medicine and Primary care (Simg).
“The new provisions of article 187 which regulate driving under the influence of psychotropic substances – explains Elena Bignami, president of Siaarti – include regularly prescribed opiate drugs and benzodiazepines, with potential consequences that could be discriminatory for patients suffering from chronic pain who are taking prescribed controlled therapies and are already afflicted by debilitating conditions. It is essential, to protect patients, to distinguish controlled therapeutic use from the illicit use of psychotropic substances.” And Silvia Natoli, head of the Siaarti cultural area, pain medicine and palliative care, highlights a significant fact: ”In Italy, around 400 thousand patients follow chronic therapies with opiates, while 2.5 million use them for limited periods under strict medical supervision. the inclusion of opiates among the sanctionable psychotropic substances could limit the right to mobility of patients who correctly take the prescribed therapies”.
These fears are reiterated by Claudio Leonardi,president of Sipad: “The new rules could also lead patients to interrupt treatment for fear of legal repercussions,with consequent clinical worsening,an increase in their suffering and an increase in the risk of driving under the influence of acute pain,which is scientifically proven to be more compromising than a possible psychotropic effect of the same opiates prescribed to relieve chronic pain”.Natoli adds: “We believe that the new legislation requires application criteria that do not penalize those who follow the prescribed therapies in a controlled manner”. In addition to the practical implications, it is essential to consider the scientific evidence on the real impact of these drugs. “It is important to underline – specifies Luca Miceli, member of the Siaarti chronic Pain section – that patients on chronic therapy with opiates at a stable and monitored dose present psychophysical alterations comparable to those induced by other categories of drugs not included in the legislation, such as some those used for neuropathic pain. Scientific literature confirms that, when taken as prescribed, these drugs do not necessarily impair driving ability.”
Past president Siaarti, Antonino Giarratano, adds: “In this context, the recent publication of the guideline on the ‘Good use of opioid drugs in the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain in adults’ represents an important technical-scientific tool. The result of a multidisciplinary collaboration between siaarti, Simg and 6 other important scientific societies and patient associations – remember – this document constitutes a basic point of reference to guarantee prescriptive appropriateness and patient safety, promoting responsible use of medicines opioids that balance therapeutic efficacy and risk minimization”.
Siaarti, Aisd, Sipad and Simg thus offer their technical-scientific collaboration to the institutions for the development of implementing regulations and secondary regulations which, in compliance with the law, establish the criteria for evaluating the suitability of driving of patients undergoing treatment with opiates, ensuring a balance between road safety and the right to treatment and access to pain therapy also enshrined in Law 38/2010.
How does the scientific community advocate for patients’ rights while promoting road safety?
Interview between Time.news Editor (T) and Expert (E) from the Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care (Siaarti)
T: Welcome! Thank you for joining us today. The recent changes to article 187 of the Highway Code have sparked considerable debate. can you provide an overview of these changes and their implications?
E: Thank you for having me! The approval of the amendments to article 187 aims to enhance road safety while addressing the complexities surrounding the treatment of patients, especially regarding the use of medical interventions. The changes stipulate stricter regulations on driving under the influence of certain substances, which is crucial for ensuring the safety of all road users. However, they also require careful consideration of the rights and responsibilities of patients undergoing treatment.
T: That’s a vital point. How do these changes balance road safety with the rights of patients, especially those who might require pain management or sedation?
E: That’s where it becomes intricate. On one hand, we want to promote a safe driving environment; on the other hand, we advocate for the humane treatment of patients who may need medication that could affect their ability to drive. Our societies recommend a collaborative approach in developing regulations that include input from medical experts to ensure that patients are not unduly penalized for their medical conditions.
T: It sounds like a delicate balance. What specific recommendations have the scientific societies made to the lawmakers regarding these regulations?
E: We’ve emphasized the importance of creating clear guidelines that take into account the pharmacokinetics of certain medications, as their effects can vary significantly among individuals. Our recommendation includes public education on the effects of these drugs, proper labeling, and providing resources for healthcare professionals to inform patients about the potential impacts on driving.
T: That’s insightful. What role do you see the scientific community playing in shaping public policy on such matters?
E: The scientific community plays a crucial role in informing and guiding policy.We can provide evidence-based data and expertise that help lawmakers understand the complexities of medical treatments and how they interact with driving regulations.Engaging in discourse with legislators is essential to ensure that the laws are not only scientifically sound but also ethically responsible.
T: Public safety is paramount, but you also mentioned human rights. Can you elaborate on why this aspect is so vital in these discussions?
E: Absolutely. Human rights, particularly the right to receive appropriate medical care without unfair repercussions, must be respected. Patients should not feel that their essential health treatments could lead to legal consequences, especially when it comes to their ability to navigate daily life, like driving. Striking that balance is imperative for fostering trust between the medical community and patients.
T: As these regulations are being developed, what advice would you give to patients who may feel anxious about their legal standing when prescribed treatment that could impact their driving?
E: I would recommend that patients engage in open dialogues with their healthcare providers about their medications and how these might affect their ability to drive. Additionally, they should stay informed about the regulations and advocate for themselves to ensure that their rights are upheld.
T: Thank you for your insights today. It’s clear that addressing road safety while respecting patients’ rights is a multifaceted challenge, and it’s encouraging to see the scientific community stepping up.
E: thank you for the opportunity to discuss these crucial issues. It’s through conversations like these that we can work toward effective and equitable solutions in the intersection of health and public safety.