An economic evaluation of a multicomponent self-management intervention for adults with epilepsy (ZMILE study)

Nonadherence to antiseizure medications: what have we learned and what can be done next?

INTRODUCTION

Nonadherence to antiseizure medications (ASMs) is associated with increased mortality, morbidity, health care utilization, and costs.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviewed 18 randomized controlled trials published between Jan 2010 and Feb 2024 on Medication Adherence Enhancing Intervention (MAEI) for people with epilepsy. The adequacy of reporting intervention development process was assessed using the GUIDance for the rEporting of intervention Development (GUIDED). The adequacy of the intervention description was assessed using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist. The interventions were categorized as educational (n = 7), behavioral (n = 5), or mixed (n = 6). The impact of MAEIs on adherence is mixed with majority of studies either reporting no difference between intervention and control groups (n = 6) or improvement in the intervention group (n = 7). The shortcomings in the reporting of MAEIs development, MAEIs description, and MAEIs impact measurement were discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Future research needs to accomplish the following tasks: 1) develop and test valid epilepsy-specific self-report measures for assessing adherence; 2) optimize intervention design; and 3) increase transparency in reporting all stages of research.

A multicenter randomized controlled feasibility trial of a digital self-management intervention for adults with epilepsy

OBJECTIVE

Self-management interventions may enhance health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in epilepsy. However, several barriers often impair their implementation in the real world. Digital interventions may help to overcome some of these barriers. Considering this, the Helpilepsy Plus Prototype was developed as a prototype smartphone-delivered self-care treatment program for adults with epilepsy.

METHODS

The 12-week Helpilepsy Plus Prototype was evaluated through a randomized controlled feasibility trial with a waiting-list control (WLC) group. Outcome measurement at baseline and at 12 weeks assessed adherence to the prototype intervention and changes in epilepsy-related outcomes. The primary endpoint was patient autonomy measured with EASE, and secondary endpoints included HRQoL measured with QOLIE-31, health literacy measured with HLQ, anxiety, and depression symptoms measured with HADS. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a heterogeneous sample of participants to assess user-friendliness and usefulness. The prototype program was delivered through the Neuroventis Platform (Neuroventis, BV, Overijse, Belgium), a certified medical device (under EU/MDD Class I, and EU/MDR grace period).

RESULTS

Ninety-two patients were included (46 in the intervention group, 46 in WLC). Most participants (63%, 58/92 women, median age 30 years) had pharmacoresistant epilepsy (61%, 56/92). Only 22% of participants (10/46) in the intervention group completed at least half of all intervention sessions. No significant differences between the intervention group and WLC were observed. Although there was a larger proportion of patients in the intervention group with meaningful improvements in HRQoL compared to WLC (19/46 versus 11/46), the difference was not significant (p = 0.119). Qualitative feedback showed that participants would appreciate more personalization, such as adaptation of the content to their current epilepsy knowledge level, a more interactive interface, shorter text sections, and interaction through reminders and notifications.

SIGNIFICANCE

Digital interventions should allow sufficient scope for personalization and interaction to increase patient engagement and enable benefits from self-care apps. Feedback loops allow the participatory development of tailored interventions.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

In this study, we investigated the effectiveness of an app-based self-help intervention. Study participants were either randomly assigned to a group that had access to the app or a group that received access to the app after the end of the study. Although a larger proportion of participants in the intervention group showed a relevant improvement in quality of life, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant. Less than one-fifth of participants in the intervention group attended at least half of all intervention sessions; patient feedback showed that patients required more personalization and interactive options.

Economic evaluations of nonpharmacological treatments for drug-resistant epilepsy: A systematic review

This study was undertaken to systematically identify and critically appraise all published full economic evaluations assessing the cost-effectiveness of nonpharmacological interventions for patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. The Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Study criteria was used to design search strategies for the identification and selection of relevant studies. Literature search was performed using the MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, International Health Technology Assessment, National Institute for Health Research Economic Evaluation Database, and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry databases to identify articles published between January 2000 and May 2023. Web of Science was additionally used to perform forward and backward referencing. Title, abstract, and full-text screening was performed by two independent researchers. The Consensus Health Economic Criteria (CHEC) checklist and Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 were applied for quality assessment. A total of 4470 studies were identified, of which 18 met our inclusion criteria. Twelve of the studies conducted model-based economic evaluation, and others were trial-based. Three studies showed that epilepsy surgery was cost-effective in adults, whereas this remained inconclusive for children (two positive, three negative). Three studies showed negative economic outcome for ketogenic diet in children. One of four studies showed positive results for self-management. For vagus nerve stimulation, one study showed positive results in adults and another one negative results in children. One recent study showed cost-effectiveness of responsive neurostimulation (RNS) in adults. Finally, one study showed promising but inconclusive results for deep brain stimulation (DBS). The mean scores for risk of bias assessment (based on CHEC) and for reporting quality (CHEERS 2022) were 95.8% and 80.5%, respectively. This review identified studies that assessed the cost-effectiveness of nonpharmacological treatments in both adults and children with drug-resistant epilepsy, suggesting that in adults, epilepsy surgery, vagus nerve stimulation, and RNS are cost-effective, and that DBS and self-management appear to be promising. In children, the cost-effectiveness of epilepsy surgery remains inconclusive. Finally, the use of ketogenic diet was shown not to be cost-effective. However, limited long-term data were available for newer interventions (i.e., ketogenic diet, DBS, and RNS).

Evaluation of a self-management intervention for adults with epilepsy in Taiwan: A longitudinal randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

Epilepsy is a neurological disease that causes recurrent seizures and can have a significant impact on a person's quality of life (QOL). A self-management intervention (SMI) can allow adults with epilepsy to modify behaviors in order to manage their seizures and evaluate the impact of medication and treatments on their daily lives. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of a SMI for adults with epilepsy.

METHODS

This was a longitudinal randomized controlled trial. Adults with epilepsy between the age of 20 and 65 years were recruited from a medical center in northern Taiwan. Participants were assigned to an intervention group (IG) or control group (CG) through simple randomization. Data regarding demographic and clinical characteristics were collected at baseline (T0). In addition, participants answered nine validated self-report questionnaires, which were used as outcome measures. Following collection of baseline data, the CG received routine monthly counseling over the next 3 months. The IG received the routine monthly counseling, as well as individual face-to-face health counseling on self-management 1 h/month and remote counseling via the phone or computer network at least twice per month. After the first month (T1) and at the end of the third (T2) and sixth months (T3) participants answered the nine questionnaires again. Differences in outcomes between the IGs and CGs were analyzed by comparing scores for the nine outcome variables at T0 with scores at T1, T2, and T3 with generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

A total of 210 adults agreed to participate in the study; however, only 155 participants completed the questionnaires for all three time points: 75 in the CG and 80 in the IG. The mean age of the 155 participants was 39.6 years (SD = 10.9). There was no significant difference between demographic or clinical variables between the two groups. The only difference in baseline scores (T0) among the nine self-report questionnaires was in epilepsy knowledge, measured with the Epilepsy Knowledge Profile questionnaire, which were significantly higher for the CG (mean = 32.28, SD = 3.92) than the IG (mean = 23.01, SD = 2.79) (p < 0.001). Generalized estimating equations (GEE) analysis showed scores decreased significantly at T3 from baseline for the CG for epilepsy knowledge and QOL (p < 0.001). Improvements in scores for sleep quality, anxiety, depression, self-efficacy, coping, and social support did not differ between groups. Classification of the IG by gender showed a significantly greater increase for males compared with females from baseline to T3 for epilepsy knowledge (p < 0.001). If we further classified the IGs by seizure frequency, participants with a seizure frequency of ≥1 per year had a more significant increase in epilepsy knowledge and increase in QOL compared with participants with a seizure frequency of <1 per year at T3 compared with T0.

CONCLUSION

The lack of improvement in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) following the SMI may indicate that additional time is required to change behaviors that impact this variable for patients with epilepsy. Additional research should focus on variables associated with medication compliance, epilepsy knowledge, medicine symptom distress, self-efficacy, anxiety, and HRQoL.

ZMILE, a multicomponent self-management intervention for adults with epilepsy: Rationale and description of the intervention

Objective:

In this paper, we aim to provide a comprehensive description of the multicomponent self-management intervention for adults with epilepsy, ZMILE.

Rationale or theory:

Acquiring self-management skills has been shown to play a vital role in enabling patients with epilepsy overcoming (health-related) struggles in daily life and coping with limitations their condition poses on them. ZMILE is a course consisting of education (to increase concordance to treatment), goal-setting (proactive coping), and self-monitoring.

Resources needed:

The course is guided by two nurse practitioners and each patient is allowed to bring one family member or friend. Self-monitoring plays an important role and can be done through e-Health tools or written diaries.

Processes involved:

During and after the course, patients are required to work toward a personally defined goal using a five-step approach by means of pro-active coping. Moreover, patients are expected to use self-monitoring tools to reflect on their own behavior and identify ways to optimize medication intake when required.

Quantification:

ZMILE is provided in an outpatient setting over five weekly group sessions and one booster session. From the start, patients are encouraged to set individual goals. Each group session will have a different theme but part of every session is reflecting on personal goals and to learn from eachother.

Conclusions:

The ZMILE-intervention has been evaluated and may be a promising intervention in terms of effectiveness and feasibility for adults with epilepsy, relatives, and professionals. We present the adapted version which can be implemented in clinical practice.

Strategies for improving adherence to antiepileptic drug treatment in people with epilepsy

BACKGROUND

Poor adherence to antiepileptic medication is associated with increased mortality, morbidity and healthcare costs. In this review, we focus on interventions designed and tested in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs to assist people with adherence to antiepileptic medication. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2011, and last updated in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving adherence to antiepileptic medication in adults and children with epilepsy.

SEARCH METHODS

For the latest update, we searched the following databases on 18 February 2020: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus and PsycINFO. CRS Web includes RCTs or quasi-RCTs from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), CENTRAL, and the Specialized Registers of Cochrane Review Groups including Epilepsy. We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs and quasi-RCTs of adherence-enhancing interventions aimed at people with a clinical diagnosis of epilepsy (as defined in individual studies), of any age and treated with antiepileptic drugs in a primary care, outpatient or other community setting.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

All review authors independently assessed lists of potentially relevant citations and abstracts. At least two review authors independently extracted data and performed a quality assessment of each study according to the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias. We graded the level of evidence for each outcome according to GRADE. The studies differed widely according to the type of intervention and measures of adherence; therefore combining data was not appropriate.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 studies reporting data on 2832 participants. Thirteen studies targeted adults with epilepsy, one study included participants of all ages, one study included participants older than two years, one recruited pediatric patients aged between 1 month to 15 years, one study targeted caregivers of children with epilepsy, one targeted adolescents and caregivers, and two studies targeted families of children with epilepsy. We identified three ongoing studies. Follow-up time was generally short in most studies, ranging from 1 to 12 months. The studies examined three main types of interventions: educational interventions, behavioural interventions and mixed interventions. All but three studies compared treatment with usual care or 'no intervention'. Due to heterogeneity between studies in terms of interventions, methods used to measure adherence and the way the studies were reported, we did not pool the results and these findings were inappropriate to be included in a meta-analysis. Education and counselling of participants with epilepsy had mixed success (moderate-certainty evidence). Behavioural interventions such as the use of intensive reminders provided more favourable effects on adherence (moderate-certainty evidence). The effect on adherence to antiepileptic drugs described by studies of mixed interventions showed improved adherence in the intervention groups compared to the control groups (high-certainty evidence). Eleven studies described seizure frequency or seizure severity or both, with four of them, reporting improved adherence and decreased seizure frequency in the intervention groups (moderate-certainty evidence). Findings related to self-efficacy and quality of life were mixed, with no clear pattern across types of intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Behavioural interventions such as intensive reminders and the use of mixed interventions demonstrate some positive results, however, we need more reliable evidence on their efficacy, derived from carefully-designed RCTs before we can draw a firm conclusion. None of the newly included studies have provided additional information that would lead to significant changes in our conclusions.

Psychological treatments for people with epilepsy

BACKGROUND

Given the significant impact epilepsy may have on the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of individuals with epilepsy and their families, there is increasing clinical interest in evidence-based psychological treatments, aimed at enhancing psychological and seizure-related outcomes for this group. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in Issue 10, 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of psychological treatments for people with epilepsy on HRQOL outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the following databases on 12 August 2019, without language restrictions: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), which includes randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials from the Specialized Registers of Cochrane Review Groups including Epilepsy, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 09 August 2019), and PsycINFO (EBSCOhost, 1887 onwards), and from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We screened the references from included studies and relevant reviews, and contacted researchers in the field for unpublished studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs for this review. HRQOL was the main outcome. For the operational definition of 'psychological treatments', we included a broad range of skills-based psychological treatments and education-only interventions designed to improve HRQOL, seizure frequency and severity, as well as psychiatric and behavioral health comorbidities for adults and children with epilepsy. These psychological treatments were compared to treatment as usual (TAU), an active control group (such as social support group), or antidepressant pharmacotherapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 36 completed RCTs, with a total of 3526 participants. Of these studies, 27 investigated skills-based psychological interventions. The remaining nine studies were education-only interventions. Six studies investigated interventions for children and adolescents, three studies investigated interventions for adolescents and adults, and the remaining studies investigated interventions for adults. Based on satisfactory clinical and methodological homogeneity, we pooled data from 11 studies (643 participants) that used the Quality of Life in Epilepsy-31 (QOLIE-31) or other QOLIE inventories (such as QOLIE-89 or QOLIE-31-P) convertible to QOLIE-31. We found significant mean changes for the QOLIE-31 total score and six subscales (emotional well-being, energy and fatigue, overall QoL, seizure worry, medication effects, and cognitive functioning). The mean changes in the QOLIE-31 total score (mean improvement of 5.23 points, 95% CI 3.02 to 7.44; P < 0.001), and the overall QoL score (mean improvement of 5.95 points, 95% CI 3.05 to 8.85; P < 0.001) exceeded the threshold of minimally important change (MIC: total score: 4.73 points; QoL score: 5.22 points), indicating a clinically meaningful postintervention improvement in HRQOL. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence provided by the meta-analysis due to serious risks of bias in some of the included studies. Consequently, these results provided moderate-certainty evidence that psychological treatments for adults with epilepsy may enhance overall HRQOL.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Implications for practice: Skills-based psychological interventions improve HRQOL in adults and adolescents with epilepsy. Adjunctive use of skills-based psychological treatments for adults and adolescents with epilepsy may provide additional benefits in HRQOL when these are incorporated into patient-centered management. We judge the evidence to be of moderate certainty.

IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH

Investigators should strictly adhere to the CONSORT guidelines to improve the quality of reporting on their interventions. A thorough description of intervention protocols is necessary to ensure reproducibility. When examining the effectiveness of psychological treatments for people with epilepsy, the use of standardized HRQOL inventories, such as the Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventories (QOLIE-31, QOLIE-31-P, and QOLIE-89) would increase comparability. Unfortunately, there is a critical gap in pediatric RCTs and RCTs including people with epilepsy and intellectual disabilities. Finally, in order to increase the overall quality of RCT study designs, adequate randomization with allocation concealment and blinded outcome assessment should be pursued. As attrition is often high in research that requires active participation, an intention-to-treat analysis should be carried out. Treatment fidelity and treatment competence should also be assessed. These important dimensions, which are related to 'Risk of bias' assessment, should always be reported.

Self-Management education for adults with poorly controlled epILEpsy [SMILE (UK)]: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Epilepsy is a common neurological condition resulting in recurrent seizures. Research evidence in long-term conditions suggests that patients benefit from self-management education and that this may improve quality of life (QoL). Epilepsy self-management education has yet to be tested in a UK setting.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Self-Management education for people with poorly controlled epILEpsy [SMILE (UK)].

DESIGN

A parallel pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Participants were recruited from eight hospitals in London and south-east England.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged ≥ 16 years with epilepsy and two or more epileptic seizures in the past year, who were currently being prescribed antiepileptic drugs.

INTERVENTION

A 2-day group self-management course alongside treatment as usual (TAU). The control group received TAU.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome is QoL in people with epilepsy at 12-month follow-up using the Quality Of Life In Epilepsy 31-P (QOLIE-31-P) scale. Other outcomes were seizure control, impact of epilepsy, medication adverse effects, psychological distress, perceived stigma, self-mastery and medication adherence. Cost-effectiveness analyses and a process evaluation were undertaken.

RANDOMISATION

A 1 : 1 ratio between trial arms using fixed block sizes of two.

BLINDING

Participants were not blinded to their group allocation because of the nature of the study. Researchers involved in data collection and analysis remained blinded throughout.

RESULTS

The trial completed successfully. A total of 404 participants were enrolled in the study [SMILE (UK), n = 205; TAU, n = 199] with 331 completing the final follow-up at 12 months [SMILE (UK), n = 163; TAU, n = 168]. In the intervention group, 61.5% completed all sessions of the course. No adverse events were found to be related to the intervention. At baseline, participants had a mean age of 41.7 years [standard deviation (SD) 14.1 years], and had epilepsy for a median of 18 years. The mean QOLIE-31-P score for the whole group at baseline was 66.0 out of 100.0 (SD 14.2). Clinically relevant levels of anxiety symptoms were reported in 53.6% of the group and depression symptoms in 28.0%. The results following an intention-to-treat analysis showed no change in any measures at the 12-month follow-up [QOLIE-31-P: SMILE (UK) mean: 67.4, SD 13.5; TAU mean: 69.5, SD 14.8]. The cost-effectiveness study showed that SMILE (UK) was possibly cost-effective but was also associated with lower QoL. The process evaluation with 20 participants revealed that a group course increased confidence by sharing with others and improved self-management behaviours.

CONCLUSIONS

For people with epilepsy and persistent seizures, a 2-day self-management education course is cost-saving, but does not improve QoL after 12-months or reduce anxiety or depression symptoms. A psychological intervention may help with anxiety and depression. Interviewed participants reported attending a group course increased their confidence and helped them improve their self-management.

FUTURE WORK

More research is needed on self-management courses, with psychological components and integration with routine monitoring.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN57937389.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 21. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Caring electronically for young outpatients who have epilepsy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to review electronic tools that might improve the delivery of epilepsy care, reduce medical care costs, and empower families to improve self-management capability.

METHOD

We reviewed the epilepsy-specific literature about self-management, electronic patient-reported or provider-reported outcomes, on-going remote surveillance, and alerting/warning systems.

CONCLUSIONS

The improved care delivery system that we envision includes self-management, electronic patient (or provider)-reported outcomes, on-going remote surveillance, and alerting/warning systems. This system and variants have the potential to reduce seizure burden through improved management, keep children out of the emergency department and hospital, and even reduce the number of outpatient visits.

Effectiveness of a multicomponent self-management intervention for adults with epilepsy (ZMILE study): A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The objective of the ZMILE study was to compare the effectiveness of a multicomponent self-management intervention (MCI) with care as usual (CAU) in adult patients with epilepsy (PWE) over a six-month period.

METHODS

Participants (PWE & relative) were randomized into intervention or CAU groups. Self-report questionnaires were used to measure disease-specific self-efficacy as the primary outcome measure and general self-efficacy, adherence, seizure severity, emotional functioning, quality of life, proactive coping, and side-effects of antiepileptic drugs (AED) as secondary outcome measures. Instruments used at baseline and during a six-month follow-up period were the following: disease-specific self-efficacy (Epilepsy Self-Efficacy Scale [ESES], General Self-Efficacy Scale [GSES]); adherence (Medication Adherence Scale [MARS] and Medication Event Monitoring System [MEMS]); seizure severity (National Hospital Seizure Severity Scale [NHS3]); emotional well-being (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS]); quality of life (Quality of Life in Epilepsy [QOLIE-31P]); proactive coping (Utrecht Proactive Coping Competence [UPCC]); and side-effects of antiepileptic drugs [SIDAED]. Multilevel analyses were performed, and baseline differences were corrected by inclusion of covariates in the analyses.

RESULTS

In total, 102 PWE were included in the study, 52 of whom were in the intervention group. On the SIDAED and on three of the quality of life subscales QOLIE-31P, a significant difference was found (p<0.05) in the intervention group. Self-efficacy, however, showed no significant differences between the MCI and the CAU groups. None of the other outcome measures showed any significant difference between the two groups.

SIGNIFICANCE

Although we found no statistically significant difference in the primary outcome measure, disease-specific self-efficacy, this MCI could prove promising, since we found improvement in some domains of quality of life in epilepsy scale and a decrease in AED side-effects in the MCI group compared with the CAU group.