Clinical governance: risk assessment in SUDEP

Status Epilepticus a risk factor for Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy (SUDEP): A scoping review and narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy (SUDEP) is a leading cause of mortality among people with epilepsy (PWE). Risk factors such as increased seizure frequency, drug-resistant epilepsy, and early epilepsy onset are well recognised. However, little evidence of the role of seizure severity, specifically Status Epilepticus (SE) on SUDEP risk exists.

OBJECTIVE

To identify mechanisms, risk factors and clinical characteristics overlap between SE and SUDEP.

METHODS

A scoping review using the PRISMA-ScR model was performed by two reviewers using suitable search terms. The PubMed Advanced Search tool along with the ancestry method was utilised to identify suitable articles published between 06/1992 and 05/2023. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed method studies were included. A narrative synthesis was undertaken and is presented as themes and subthemes.

RESULTS

Of 5453 papers identified in the preliminary search, 50 studies were suitable for final analysis. Key themes include overlap between SE complications and SUDEP risk factors (pharmaco-resistant generalised tonic-clonic epilepsy, intellectual disability), overlap of shared risk factors (alcohol abuse, developmental epileptic encephalopathies) and clinical characteristics (cardiac and respiratory). SE's role in development of drug-resistant epilepsy was the strongest potential mechanism for SE's contribution to SUDEP risk. SE's contribution to recurrent ictal hypoxaemia episodes and lowered heart rate variability suggests a relationship with SUDEP needing further study.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identifies research areas of influence of SE on SUDEP risk. Such research could inform counselling for patients concerned about seizure severity in relation to their SUDEP risk and optimise surveillance and subsequent management of post-SE epileptogenic outcomes.

Epilepsy professionals' views on sudden unexpected death in epilepsy counselling: A tale of two countries

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) is a leading cause of epilepsy mortality. All international guidance strongly advocates for clinicians working with people with epilepsy (PWE) to discuss SUDEP. Clinician views working with PWE in the UK and Norway on SUDEP counselling are compared.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online mixed methodology survey of 17 Likert and free-text response questions using validated themes was circulated via International League against Epilepsy/Epilepsy Specialist Nurses Association in the UK and International League against Epilepsy/Epilepsinet in Norway using a non-discriminatory exponential snowballing technique leading to non-probability sampling. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and Mann-Whitney, Kruskal-Wallis, chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests. Significance was accepted at p < 0.05. Thematic analysis was conducted on free-text responses.

RESULTS

Of 309 (UK 197, Norway 112) responses, UK clinicians were more likely to have experienced an SUDEP (p < 0.001), put greater importance on SUDEP communication (p < 0.001), discuss SUDEP with all PWE particularly new patients (p < 0.001), have access and refer to bereavement support (p < 0.001) and were less likely to never discuss SUDEP (p < 0.001). Significant differences existed between both countries' neurologists and nurses in SUDEP counselling with UK clinicians generally being more supportive. UK responders were more likely to be able to identify bereavement support (p < 0.001). Thematic analysis highlighted four shared themes and two specific to Norwegians.

DISCUSSION

Despite all international guidelines stating the need/importance to discuss SUDEP with all PWE there remain hesitation, avoidance and subjectivity in clinicians having SUDEP-related conversations, more so in Norway than the UK. Training and education are required to improve communication, engagement and decision making.

Knowledge, attitudes and practices of psychiatrists in India regarding sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) and seizure-related harm

Sudden unexpected death in Epilepsy (SUDEP) is one of the leading causes of death in people with epilepsy (PWE). Awareness and taking adequate preventive measures are pivotal to reducing SUDEP. Nearly 80% of PWE live in lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) such as India where for many, epilepsy management is by psychiatrists. To evaluate the knowledge, attitude and practices of Indian psychiatrists on SUDEP and seizure risk. A cross-sectional online survey of 12 Likert response questions using validated themes, was circulated among Indian Psychiatric Society members. Non-discriminatory exponential snowballing technique leading to convenience non-probability sampling was used. The inquiry involved SUDEP-related topics including the need for and importance of counselling. Descriptive statistics and the chi-square test were used for analysis. The psychiatrists responding (n = 134) were likely to be males (72.4 %), urban (94 %) and affiliated to academic institutions (76.1 %). Nearly all saw PWE monthly with over half (54 %) seeing more than 10. Nearly two-third (64.17 %) did not counsel PWE regarding SUDEP, due to fear of raising concerns in caregivers/family (33.3 %), patients (38.9 %) or lack of time (35.6 %), though 37 % had lost patients due to SUDEP. Over two-third (66.7 %) agreed risk counselling was important. Barriers included fear of raising concerns, limited time, and training. A strong need for national SUDEP guidelines (89 %) and suitable training (75.4 %) was expressed. Though epilepsy care is provided by a considerable number of psychiatrists, there is a poor understanding of SUDEP. Enhancing the awareness and understanding of SUDEP is likely to enhance epilepsy care.

An evidence-based approach to provide essential and desirable components to develop surveys on Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy (SUDEP) for doctors: A focused review

Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy (SUDEP) is a major concern for people with epilepsy, their families, their care givers, and medical professionals. There is inconsistency in the SUDEP counselling doctors provide, compared to what is recommended in clinical guidelines. Numerous national and international surveys have highlighted how epilepsy professionals, usually doctors, deliver SUDEP risk counselling, particularly, when they deliver it and to whom. These surveys help understand the unmet need, develop suitable strategies, and raise awareness among clinicians with the eventual goal to reduce SUDEPs. However, there is no standardised survey or essential set of questions identified that can be used to evaluate SUDEP counselling practice globally. This focused review analyses the content of all published SUDEP counselling surveys for medical professionals (n=16) to date covering over 4000 doctors across over 30 countries and five continents. It identifies 36 question themes across three topics. The questions are then reviewed by an expert focus group of SUDEP communication experts including three doctors, an expert statistician and SUDEP Action, an UK based charity specialising in epilepsy deaths with a pre-set criterion. The review and focus group provide ten essential questions that should be included in all future surveys inquiring on SUDEP counselling. They could be used to evaluate current practice and compare findings over time, between services, across countries and between professional groups. They are provided as a template to download and use. The review also explores if there is a continued need in future for similar surveys to justify this activity.

'They don't actually join the dots': An exploration of organizational change in Irish opiate community treatment services

BACKGROUND

People who use community-based drug treatment services spend a considerable amount of their time in treatment in direct contact with frontline staff. These staff are also fundamental to supporting the implementation of change to meet service user needs. Yet, very little is known about staff perspectives on the process and internal dynamics of drug treatment services, their views about what makes services work effectively, and how services can more effectively adopt to changes in practice.

AIM AND METHOD

Conducted across Irish community opiate prescribing services and drawing on data from 12 in-depth qualitative interviews with frontline staff. This paper examines the narratives of staff about the factors which influence the dynamics and process of treatment services, particularly in relation to the implantation of change.

FINDINGS

Change itself was described both in respect of how a service responded to immediate service user needs or supported planned change. Little distinction was made in respect of service attributes which facilitated a response in either context. Overwhelmingly, staff contextualised current service effectiveness, historical change, and desired change in how effectively their services met service user needs, which was also viewed as a significant motivation for change. Differences in operational standards across services in terms of practices, policy implementation, job roles, divisions between professional groups, and recruitment and retention of staff inhibited change adoption. Factors which were identified in terms of inhibiting or facilitating planned change were consistent with the wider literature on change implementation but provided unique insights in the context of substance misuse services.

CONCLUSIONS

A range of interdependent factors which influence an 'eco-system' of service delivery were identified. Effective policy implementation in Ireland remains aspirational, but findings reported in this paper have important implications for future planning and design of services for people who use drugs, and provide a good basis for further investigation.

Developing an Evidence-Based Epilepsy Risk Assessment eHealth Solution: From Concept to Market

Introduction

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) is possibly the most common cause of death as a result of complications from epilepsy. The need to educate and regularly review risk for all patients with epilepsy is paramount, but rarely delivered in actual clinical practice. Evidence suggests that education around SUDEP and modifiable risk variables translate into better self-management of epilepsy.

Objective

We aimed to develop and implement an eHealth solution to support education and self-management of risks, in epilepsy.

Methods

We undertook an innovation pathways approach, including problem identification, feasibility assessment, design, implementation, and marketing. People with epilepsy were provided a smartphone-based app (Epilepsy Self-Monitor, EpSMon), which translates the clinical risk assessment tool into an educational and self-monitoring platform, for the self-management of epilepsy.

Results

Results include the success of the marketing campaign, and in what areas, with an estimated reach of approximately 38 million people. EpSMon has proved a success in academic and clinical circles, attracting awards and nominations for awards. The number of users of EpSMon, after 3 months, turned out to be lower than expected (N=221). A 4-month trial of the app in use in the United Kingdom, and the success of the marketing strategy, point to necessary changes to the model of delivery and marketing, summarized in this paper. These include the marketing message, user cost model, and need for the availability of an Android version.

Conclusions

EpSMon has proven a success in respect to its reception by academics, clinicians, stakeholder groups, and the patients who use it. There is work needed to promote the model and increase its acceptability/attractiveness, including broadening the marketing message, increasing its availability, and reducing its cost. Future development and promotion of the tool will hopefully inform iterative design of its core features for a receptive audience and lead to increased uptake as it is launched worldwide in 2016.

A community study in Cornwall UK of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) in a 9-year population sample

PURPOSE

Epilepsy-related death, particularly sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP), is underestimated by healthcare professionals. One argument that physicians use to justify the failure to discuss SUDEP with patients and their families is that there is a lack of evidence for any protective interventions. However, there is growing evidence of potentially modifiable risk factors for SUDEP; although large-scale trials of interventions are still lacking. We determined the main risk factors associated with SUDEP in a comprehensive community sample of epilepsy deaths in Cornwall UK from 2004 to 2012.

METHODS

We systemically inspected 93 cases of all epilepsy and epilepsy associated deaths which occurred in Cornwall between 2004 and 2012 made available to us by the HM Cornwall coroner. These are the deaths where epilepsy was a primary or a secondary cause.

RESULTS

48 cases met the criteria for SUDEP and we elicited associated relevant risk factors. Many findings from our study are comparable to what has been reported previously. New points such as most of the population had increase in either or both seizure frequency/intensity within six months of death and majority did not have an epilepsy specialist review in the last one year to demise were noted.

CONCLUSION

This study is the first epidemiological study in England occurring in a whole population identifying systemically all deaths and the first large scale review in UK of SUDEP deaths since 2005. Being a community based study a key issue which was highlighted was that in the SUDEPs examined many might have been potentially preventable.