Categorization and labeling systems concerning driving-impairing medicines: A scoping review

Abstract

Objective

Classification systems concerning driving-impairing medicines can help healthcare providers identify medicinal drugs with no or the least impairing effects and inform patients of the potential risks of certain medicines to safe driving. This study aimed to comprehensively assess the characteristics of classifications and labeling systems regarding driving-impairing medicines.

Methods

Google Scholar and several databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE, safetylit.org, and TRID were searched to identify the relevant published material. The retrieved material was assessed for eligibility. Data extraction was done to compare the categorization/labeling systems concerning driving-impairing medicines in terms of characteristics such as the number of categories, description of each category, and description of pictograms.

Results

After screening 5,852 records, 20 studies were selected for inclusion in the review. This review identified 22 categorization/labeling systems regarding medicines and driving. Classification systems had different characteristics, but most of them were designed based on the graded categorization system described by Wolschrijn. Initially, categorization systems had seven levels, but later the medicine impacts were summarized into 3 or 4 levels.

Conclusions

Although different categorization/labeling systems regarding driving-impairing medicines are available, the most effective systems in changing driver’s behavior are the simple and understandable ones. Besides, health care providers should consider patient’s socio-demographic features when informing them about driving under the influence.

Keywords:

• Drug categorization
• warning label
• drugged driving
• driving under the influence
• medicinal drug

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the staff of the Road Traffic Injury Research Center for their cooperation.

Disclosure statement

The authors declare no conflict of interests.

Additional information

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.