Antiseizure medication withdrawal risk estimation and recommendations: A survey of American Academy of Neurology and EpiCARE members

Author:

Terman Samuel W.1ORCID,van Griethuysen Renate2ORCID,Rheaume Carole E.3,Slinger Geertruida4ORCID,Haque Anisa S.5,Smith Shawna N.6,Kerr Wesley T.1,van Asch Charlotte2,Otte Willem M.4ORCID,Ferreira‐Atuesta Carolina789,Galovic Marian1011,Burke James F.12,Braun Kees P. J.4

Affiliation:

1. Department of Neurology University of Michigan Ann Arbor Michigan USA

2. Department of Clinical Neurophysiology and Sleep Centre SEIN Zwolle The Netherlands

3. American Academy of Neurology Minneapolis Minnesota USA

4. Department of Child Neurology UMC Utrecht Brain Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, member of ERN EpiCARE Utrecht University Utrecht The Netherlands

5. University of Michigan Medical School Ann Arbor Michigan USA

6. Department of Health Management and Policy University of Michigan School of Public Health Ann Arbor Michigan USA

7. Department of Clinical and Experimental Epilepsy (DCEE) NIHR University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology London UK

8. Chalfont Centre for Epilepsy Chalfont St Peter UK

9. Department of Neurology The Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai New York New York USA

10. Department of Neurology, Clinical Neuroscience Center University Hospital and University of Zurich Zurich Switzerland

11. MRI Unit Chalfont Centre for Epilepsy Chalfont St Peter UK

12. Department of Neurology Ohio State University Columbus Ohio USA

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveChoosing candidates for antiseizure medication (ASM) withdrawal in well‐controlled epilepsy is challenging. We evaluated (a) the correlation between neurologists' seizure risk estimation (“clinician predictions”) vs calculated predictions, (b) how viewing calculated predictions influenced recommendations, and (c) barriers to using risk calculation.MethodsWe asked US and European neurologists to predict 2‐year seizure risk after ASM withdrawal for hypothetical vignettes. We compared ASM withdrawal recommendations before vs after viewing calculated predictions, using generalized linear models.ResultsThree‐hundred and forty‐six neurologists responded. There was moderate correlation between clinician and calculated predictions (Spearman coefficient 0.42). Clinician predictions varied widely, for example, predictions ranged 5%‐100% for a 2‐year seizure‐free adult without epileptiform abnormalities. Mean clinician predictions exceeded calculated predictions for vignettes with epileptiform abnormalities (eg, childhood absence epilepsy: clinician 65%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 57%‐74%; calculated 46%) and surgical vignettes (eg, focal cortical dysplasia 6‐month seizure‐free mean clinician 56%, 95% CI 52%‐60%; calculated 28%). Clinicians overestimated the influence of epileptiform EEG findings on withdrawal risk (26%, 95% CI 24%‐28%) compared with calculators (14%, 95% 13%‐14%). Viewing calculated predictions slightly reduced willingness to withdraw (−0.8/10 change, 95% CI −1.0 to −0.7), particularly for vignettes without epileptiform abnormalities. The greatest barrier to calculator use was doubting its accuracy (44%).SignificanceClinicians overestimated the influence of abnormal EEGs particularly for low‐risk patients and overestimated risk and the influence of seizure‐free duration for surgical patients, compared with calculators. These data may question widespread ordering of EEGs or time‐based seizure‐free thresholds for surgical patients. Viewing calculated predictions reduced willingness to withdraw particularly without epileptiform abnormalities.

Funder

American Academy of Neurology

American Epilepsy Society

Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research

National Institutes of Health

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Neurology (clinical),Neurology

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3