Baseline factors predicting early resumption of driving after life-threatening arrhythmias in the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Trial

Background In the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Trial, patients with ventricular fibrillation or hemodynamically unstable ventricular tachycardia were randomly assigned to receive either an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) or antiarrhythmic drug therapy. As part of the trial, patients were asked to participate in a prospective driving survey. The purpose of the survey was to determine what baseline factors and patient characteristics specifically predicted resumption of driving earlier than advised by current guidelines. Methods Patients were surveyed anonymously as to their driving habits in the initial period after random assignment and every 6 months thereafter. AVID study coordinators were independently asked to assess their patients’ driving status as well. The relation between baseline factors and time to resumption of driving was explored by means of Kaplan-Meier estimates for univariate analyses and the stepwise Cox proportional hazards regression model for multivariate analyses. Results There were 802 patients who were eligible for assessment of driving status. The majority of patients (58%) resumed driving an automobile within 6 months of their index arrhythmia regardless of whether they received drug therapy or an ICD. By multivariate analysis, patients who were younger than 65 years of age, male, and college educated were more likely to drive early, as were patients whose index arrhythmia was ventricular tachycardia. Conclusions Younger, college-educated men and those whose index arrhythmia is ventricular tachycardia are most likely to resume driving <6 months after the initiation of therapy for a potentially life-threatening ventricular arrhythmia. Patients with an ICD did not appear to resume driving later than those who were discharged on antiarrhythmic drugs alone. (Am Heart J 2001;142:99-104.)