Atul K. Kapur

CAEP position statement on cellphone use while driving

Distracted driving caused by cellphone use is a significant source of needless injuries. These injuries place unnecessary financial burden, emotional stress and health care resource misuse on society. This paper states the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEPs) position on cellphone use while driving. In recent years, numerous studies were conducted on the danger of cellphone use while driving. Research has shown that cellphone use while driving negatively impacts cognitive functions, visual fields, reaction time and overall driving performances. Some studies found that cellphone use is as dangerous as driving under the influence of alcohol. Moreover, vehicle crash rates were shown to be significantly higher when drivers used cellphones. Countermeasures have been implemented in recent years. Over 50 countries worldwide have laws limiting the use of cellphones while driving. Six Canadian provinces, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Quebec, Ontario, British Columbia and Saskatchewan, currently have legislation prohibiting cellphone use. Other provinces are considering implementing similar bans. As emergency physicians, we must advocate for injury prevention. Cell phone related road traumas are avoidable. CAEP supports all measures to ban cellphone use while driving.

CAEP position statement on gun control.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Firearm-related injury and death continue to be a significant problem in Canada. Since the 1990s Canadian emergency physicians (EPs) have played an active role in advocating for gun control. This paper updates the Canadian Association of Emergency Physician’s (CAEP’s) position on gun control. Despite a media focus on homicide, the majority of firearm-related deaths are a result of suicide. Less than 40% of firearm-related injuries are intentionally inflicted by another person. Since the implementation of Canada’s gun registry in 1995, there has been a significant reduction in firearm-related suicides and intimate partner homicides. Proposed weakening of gun laws in Canada will have a significant impact on firearm-related mortality and injury. There must be instead an expansion of programs focused on prevention of suicide, intimate partner violence and gang-related violence. The majority of intentional or unintentional firearm-related injuries involve a violation of safe storage or handling practice. The potential for future harm because of unsafe storage or handling or through gang conflict retribution supports our position that health care facilities report gunshot wounds (GSWs). Moreover, a nationwide surveillance system is necessary to support research and to guide future public policy development and legislation. As EPs we must advocate for injury control. All firearm injuries and deaths are preventable, and we must advocate for a multifaceted approach in order to minimize this risk to our patients.

Énoncé de position de l’ACMU sur le contrôle des armes à feu

Même si la couverture des médias porte généralement sur les homicides, la majorité des décès par balle est en réalité le résultat de suicides. Moins de 40 % des blessures par armes à feu sont infligées intentionnellement par une autre personne. Depuis la mise en application du Registre des armes à feu en 1995 au Canada, on a constaté une réduction importante des suicides par balle et des homicides par un conjoint. La proposition d’assouplir la législation sur les armes à feu au Canada aura des répercussions importantes sur les décès et les blessures par balle. Il faut plutôt élargir les programmes axés sur la prévention du suicide, de la violence conjugale et de la violence liée aux gangs de rue.