A journey into the unknown: An ethnographic examination of drug-resistant epilepsy treatment and management in the United States

Patterns of utilization and cost of healthcare services and pharmacotherapy among patients with drug-resistant epilepsy during the two-year period before neurostimulation: A descriptive analysis of the journey to implantation based on analyses of a large United States healthcare claims database

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a descriptive assessment of patterns of utilization and cost of healthcare services and pharmacotherapies among patients with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) before neurostimulator implantation.

METHODS

Using a large United States healthcare claims database, we identified all patients with DRE who were implanted with neurostimulators between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2019. Patients without an epilepsy diagnosis on their implantation date were excluded, as were those without (1) anti-seizure medication (ASM) dispenses within 12 months of implantation date, and (2) continuous enrollment for the 24-month period before this date. Demographic and clinical characteristics were assessed over the two-year period before implantation, as were patterns of utilization and cost of healthcare services and pharmacotherapy. Care was assessed as all-cause or epilepsy-related, with the latter defined as all medical (inpatient and outpatient) care resulting in diagnoses of epilepsy and all ASM dispenses.

RESULTS

Eight hundred sixty patients met all selection criteria. Among these patients, comorbidities were common, including depression (27%), anxiety (30%), and learning disabilities (25%). Fifty-nine percent of patients had ≥1 all-cause hospitalizations; 57% had ≥1 epilepsy-related admissions. Patients averaged 8.6 epilepsy-related visits to physicians' offices, including 5.1 neurologist visits. Mean all-cause and epilepsy-related healthcare costs during the pre-implantation period were $123,500 and $91,995, respectively; corresponding median values were $74,567 and $53,029. Median monthly all-cause healthcare costs increased by 138% during the 24-month period (from $1,042 to $2,481 in the month prior to implantation); median epilepsy-related costs, by 290% (from $383 to $1,492).

CONCLUSIONS

The two-year period before neurostimulator implantation is a long and costly journey. Estimates likely minimize the burden experienced during this period, given that seizure frequency and severity-and corresponding impacts on quality of life-were unavailable in these data. Further research is needed to understand the clinical, economic, and psychological impact of the time between DRE onset and implantation among qualifying patients.

Experience of waiting for seizure freedom and perception of machine learning technologies to support treatment decision: A qualitative study in adults with recent onset epilepsy

PURPOSE

With no reliable surrogate biomarkers for treatment response, people with epilepsy currently await the passage of time to determine whether prescribed treatments are effective. Few studies have examined the issues faced by people with epilepsy during this waiting period. We aim to explore the experiences of people with recently diagnosed epilepsy as they wait to achieve seizure freedom.

METHODS

We purposively sampled adults of working age who had been diagnosed and treated for epilepsy for less than four years. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken between July and September 2021. A thematic analysis using a framework approach was performed.

RESULTS

We recruited 15 patients. Results revealed four main themes: 1) Impact on mental health, as people with newly diagnosed epilepsy described waiting for seizure freedom as a time of vulnerability, uncertainty, and confusion. 2) Participants described their life as "on hold", prior to achieving effective seizure control 3) Difficulty navigating health systems to find and understand information about epilepsy, tests, and medications, and to find the 'right' health professional to address their needs. 4) Technology systems that support clinician decision making with selecting effective medications early after diagnosis were cautiously welcomed by participants.

CONCLUSION

Interventions are needed to reduce the negative impacts experienced by people who are newly diagnosed with epilepsy while waiting for effective seizure control. Technology systems that support clinician decision making were acceptable, as people with epilepsy sought accessible and effective solutions to restore a sense of control in their lives.

Unmet needs of people with epilepsy: A qualitative study exploring their journey from presentation to long-term management across five European countries

Introduction

Epilepsy is a neurological disease that can negatively impact a person's physical, psychological, social, and emotional well-being. The aim of this study was to provide insights into the experiences of people with epilepsy on polytherapy (i.e., people on a combination of two or more anti-seizure medications [ASMs]), with an emphasis on their emotional journey.

Methods

Market research was conducted with 40 people with epilepsy from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom. Semi-structured interviews were analyzed using both a content and framework analysis approach. A content analysis of participants' expressed emotions was used to illustrate the changes of emotions experienced by people with epilepsy from presentation through to monitoring and follow-up stages.

Results

In each stage of the journey, themes and subthemes were identified under the overarching headings: Stage 1: Presentation - Life is turned upside down; Stage 2: Diagnosis - Period of learning; Stage 3: Treatment - Aspirations and experimentation; and Stage 4: Monitoring and follow-up - Feeling "out on a limb". The research identified key unmet needs and opportunities for people with epilepsy to improve their subjective experiences at different stages of their disease journey, namely: (1) establish and promote support networks from presentation through to monitoring and follow-up stages; (2) accelerate pathway to diagnosis; (3) provide opportunities to discuss the diagnosis with patients; (4) clarify treatment-change guidelines for patients; and (5) develop a shared treatment decision-making/empowerment tool.

Discussion

The research findings and recommendations have the potential to drive change at an individual level, as well as at a healthcare level.

Responsive Neurostimulation Targeting the Anterior, Centromedian and Pulvinar Thalamic Nuclei and the Detection of Electrographic Seizures in Pediatric and Young Adult Patients

Background

Responsive neurostimulation (RNS System) has been utilized as a treatment for intractable epilepsy. The RNS System delivers stimulation in response to detected abnormal activity, via leads covering the seizure foci, in response to detections of predefined epileptiform activity with the goal of decreasing seizure frequency and severity. While thalamic leads are often implanted in combination with cortical strip leads, implantation and stimulation with bilateral thalamic leads alone is less common, and the ability to detect electrographic seizures using RNS System thalamic leads is uncertain.

Objective

The present study retrospectively evaluated fourteen patients with RNS System depth leads implanted in the thalamus, with or without concomitant implantation of cortical strip leads, to determine the ability to detect electrographic seizures in the thalamus. Detailed patient presentations and lead trajectories were reviewed alongside electroencephalographic (ECoG) analyses.

Results

Anterior nucleus thalamic (ANT) leads, whether bilateral or unilateral and combined with a cortical strip lead, successfully detected and terminated epileptiform activity, as demonstrated by Cases 2 and 3. Similarly, bilateral centromedian thalamic (CMT) leads or a combination of one centromedian thalamic alongside a cortical strip lead also demonstrated the ability to detect electrographic seizures as seen in Cases 6 and 9. Bilateral pulvinar leads likewise produced reliable seizure detection in Patient 14. Detections of electrographic seizures in thalamic nuclei did not appear to be affected by whether the patient was pediatric or adult at the time of RNS System implantation. Sole thalamic leads paralleled the combination of thalamic and cortical strip leads in terms of preventing the propagation of electrographic seizures.

Conclusion

Thalamic nuclei present a promising target for detection and stimulation via the RNS System for seizures with multifocal or generalized onsets. These areas provide a modifiable, reversible therapeutic option for patients who are not candidates for surgical resection or ablation.