The social causes of inequality in epilepsy and developing a rehabilitation strategy: A U.K.-based analysis

Social support and the burden of physical and psychiatric comorbidities in the patients with late-onset epilepsy in China: A cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

Epilepsy is the third most common neurological disorder in elderly people. Patients with epilepsy (PWEs) are more likely to have comorbidities. Social support is very important for PWEs. However, there are many gaps in the research on social support in older PWEs, especially the correlation between social support and comorbidities.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted in three hospitals in China. Social support was assessed using the Social Support Rate Scale. The burden of physical comorbidities was assessed using the CCI, and global disability was assessed using the mRS. The NDDIE was used to assess depression, the GAD7 was used for anxiety, the CDR was used for cognitive status, and the NPI was used for psychotic symptoms.

RESULTS

A total of 154 older PWEs participated in the study. There were 97 patients with at least one physical comorbidities. The burden of physical comorbidities was negatively correlated with overall social support (Adj. r = -0.35, P < 0.001) and global disability (Adj. r = -0.45, P < 0.001). In terms of psychiatric comorbidities, anxiety, depression, and cognitive status were not correlated with overall social support (Adj. r = -0.03, -0.02, and -0.11, P > 0.05). Psychotic symptoms were correlated with overall social support (Adj. r = -0.20, P < 0.05). The overall burden of psychiatric comorbidities was associated with overall social support (r = 0.30, P < 0.01).

DISCUSSION

Neurologists and social workers should consider more personalized biopsychosocial care to improve the quality of life of older PWEs.

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of physiotherapists with regard to epilepsy and patients with epilepsy: A systematic scoping review

BACKGROUND

In today's healthcare systems, physiotherapists are one of the most important providers of care services to patients with disabilities including those with epilepsy. The aims of this systematic scoping review were to identify, summarize, and present narrative synthesis of qualitative evidence on knowledge, attitudes, and practices of physiotherapists toward epilepsy and patients with epilepsy.

METHODS

Primary studies were searched in Medline/PubMed, Embase, Science Direct, SpringerLink, CInAHL/EBSCO, Cochrane library, and Scopus as late as July 02, 2021. Appraisal of the methodological quality was conducted for the studies included in this systematic scoping review. Due to the heterogenous nature of the collected data, results of this study are presented as narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

A total of 11 were finally included in the qualitative synthesis. The selected studies were published in the period between 2016 and 2020. The studies included in this review had acceptable methodological quality in many of the 11 domains of the quality assessment tool. Contents of the included studies were grouped into the 11 themes and 8 subthemes. The major themes were related education/access to information, interaction with patients, witnessing seizures, barriers and promoters of adequate knowledge and attitudes, and interventions to improve knowledge and attitudes.

CONCLUSION

Currently, high-quality interventional studies are needed to improve knowledge, attitudes, and practices of physiotherapists with regard to epilepsy and patients with epilepsy. Future studies are still needed to investigate if improving knowledge, attitudes, and practices of physiotherapists with regard to epilepsy and patients with epilepsy can improve health-related outcomes of the patients.

Best care for older people with epilepsy: A scoping review

There are two peaks of diagnosis of epilepsy: in childhood and in people over 65. Older people may have complex needs like co-morbidity, polypharmacy, frailty, and social isolation. This scoping review focusses on the care of older people with epilepsy beyond diagnosis and medical treatment. We sought to identify areas within the UK health service needing development either in clinical practice or through further research. The search returned 4864 papers with 33 papers included in the review. The papers were grouped into psychosocial, self-management and services themes. Only one randomised controlled trial was found. Research was mainly based on cohort and case-control studies. Older people require more information to self-manage epilepsy and more psychological support to help with symptoms of anxiety and depression. People reported experiencing stigma and a reluctance to disclose their condition. This may increase the risk of isolation and difficulties in managing epilepsy. Studies reported that older people are referred less to neurologists, suggesting there may be a gap in care provision compared to younger people. Generalist health professionals may be better placed to provide holistic care, but they may need additional training to alleviate uncertainties in managing epilepsy. Care plans could help provide information, particularly for co-morbidity, but few had one. Our findings highlight psychological and self-management needs for managing epilepsy in older people. Health service staff may require upskilling to shift epilepsy management from neurologists to generalists. More research is needed regarding psychological and self-management interventions, particularly in the form of randomised controlled trials.

Seizure first aid training for people with epilepsy attending emergency departments and their significant others: the SAFE intervention and feasibility RCT

Background

No seizure first aid training intervention exists for people with epilepsy who regularly attend emergency departments and their significant others, despite such an intervention’s potential to reduce clinically unnecessary and costly visits.

Objectives

The objectives were to (1) develop Seizure first Aid training For Epilepsy (SAFE) by adapting a broader intervention and (2) determine the feasibility and optimal design of a definitive randomised controlled trial to test SAFE’s efficacy.

Design

The study involved (1) the development of an intervention informed by a co-design approach with qualitative feedback and (2) a pilot randomised controlled trial with follow-ups at 3, 6 and 12 months and assessments of treatment fidelity and the cost of SAFE’s delivery.

Setting

The setting was (1) third-sector patient support groups and professional health-care organisations and (2) three NHS emergency departments in England.

Participants

Participants were (1) people with epilepsy who had visited emergency departments in the prior 2 years, their significant others and emergency department, paramedic, general practice, commissioning, neurology and nursing representatives and (2) people with epilepsy aged ≥ 16 years who had been diagnosed for ≥ 1 year and who had made two or more emergency department visits in the prior 12 months, and one of their significant others. Emergency departments identified ostensibly eligible people with epilepsy from attendance records and patients confirmed their eligibility.

Interventions

Participants in the pilot randomised controlled trial were randomly allocated 1 : 1 to SAFE plus treatment as usual or to treatment as usual only.

Main outcome measures

Consent rate and availability of routine data on emergency department use at 12 months were the main outcome measures. Other measures of interest included eligibility rate, ease with which people with epilepsy could be identified and routine data secured, availability of self-reported emergency department data, self-reported emergency department data’s comparability with routine data, SAFE’s effect on emergency department use, and emergency department use in the treatment as usual arm, which could be used in sample size calculations.

Results

(1) Nine health-care professionals and 23 service users provided feedback that generated an intervention considered to be NHS feasible and well positioned to achieve its purpose. (2) The consent rate was 12.5%, with 53 people with epilepsy and 38 significant others recruited. The eligibility rate was 10.6%. Identifying people with epilepsy from attendance records was resource intensive for emergency department staff. Those recruited felt more stigmatised because of epilepsy than the wider epilepsy population. Routine data on emergency department use at 12 months were secured for 94.1% of people with epilepsy, but the application process took 8.5 months. Self-reported emergency department data were available for 66.7% of people with epilepsy, and people with epilepsy self-reported more emergency department visits than were captured in routine data. Most participants (76.9%) randomised to SAFE received the intervention. The intervention was delivered with high fidelity. No related serious adverse events occurred. Emergency department use at 12 months was lower in the SAFE plus treatment as usual arm than in the treatment as usual only arm, but not significantly so. Calculations indicated that a definitive trial would need ≈ 674 people with epilepsy and ≈ 39 emergency department sites.

Limitations

Contrary to patient statements on recruitment, routine data secured at the pilot trial’s end indicated that ≈ 40% may not have satisfied the inclusion criterion of two or more emergency department visits.

Conclusions

An intervention was successfully developed, a pilot randomised controlled trial conducted and outcome data secured for most participants. The consent rate did not satisfy a predetermined ‘stop/go’ level of ≥ 20%. The time that emergency department staff needed to identify eligible people with epilepsy is unlikely to be replicable. A definitive trial is currently not feasible.

Future work

Research to more easily identify and recruit people from the target population is required.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN13871327.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 39. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Inclusion of general physicians in the multidisciplinary treatment team for epilepsy may lead to an economic benefit

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to compare epileptic seizure control and economic impact in patients with epilepsy between when they were seen by general physicians (GPs) versus epilepsy specialists.

METHOD

We began distributing a booklet we named the "Epi Passport" to patients with epilepsy in December 2014 to share information within the regional epilepsy network of GPs, epilepsy specialists, and patients (Gep). We compared seizure control and household income levels before and after the introduction of this booklet.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in seizure control between patients who saw specialists or GPs (P = 0.215). Significant increases in household income were seen among 134 patients (36.6%) in the post-Epi Passport period who were primarily seen by GPs (P < 0.001). However, 35 patients (9.6%) showed a decrease in income between periods, and 197 patients (53.8%) showed no change. Age of 20-39 years old was significantly associated with increases in household income (P = 0.0287).

CONCLUSION

After the introduction of the Epi Passport, about one-third of the patients with epilepsy who were mainly seen by GPs in their community showed an increase in household income. There was no difference in seizure control among those who saw a GP or a specialist. Inclusion of GPs in the multidisciplinary treatment team for epilepsy may lead to increased patient income because of the fact that patients can manage their epilepsy in their community using their GP.

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.

Characteristics associated with quality of life among people with drug-resistant epilepsy

Quality of Life (QoL) is the preferred outcome in non-pharmacological trials, but there is little UK population evidence of QoL in epilepsy. In advance of evaluating an epilepsy self-management course we aimed to describe, among UK participants, what clinical and psycho-social characteristics are associated with QoL. We recruited 404 adults attending specialist clinics, with at least two seizures in the prior year and measured their self-reported seizure frequency, co-morbidity, psychological distress, social characteristics, including self-mastery and stigma, and epilepsy-specific QoL (QOLIE-31-P). Mean age was 42 years, 54% were female, and 75% white. Median time since diagnosis was 18 years, and 69% experienced ≥10 seizures in the prior year. Nearly half (46%) reported additional medical or psychiatric conditions, 54% reported current anxiety and 28% reported current depression symptoms at borderline or case level, with 63% reporting felt stigma. While a maximum QOLIE-31-P score is 100, participants’ mean score was 66, with a wide range (25–99). In order of large to small magnitude: depression, low self-mastery, anxiety, felt stigma, a history of medical and psychiatric comorbidity, low self-reported medication adherence, and greater seizure frequency were associated with low QOLIE-31-P scores. Despite specialist care, UK people with epilepsy and persistent seizures experience low QoL. If QoL is the main outcome in epilepsy trials, developing and evaluating ways to reduce psychological and social disadvantage are likely to be of primary importance. Educational courses may not change QoL, but be one component supporting self-management for people with long-term conditions, like epilepsy.

People with epilepsy obtain added value from education in groups: results of a qualitative study

Background and purpose

Having epilepsy requires individuals to learn about self‐management. So far, trials of self‐management courses have not included in‐depth qualitative evaluations of how the learning method influences participants’ perceptions and behaviour. We aimed to interview participants who had attended a course, as part of a randomized controlled trial, to examine: (i) their perceptions of what they valued and negative aspects of the intervention, and (ii) whether and in what ways they continued to make use of the training.

Methods

Twenty participants were selected within 6 months of undertaking a course from the larger randomized controlled trial conducted in England. Semi‐structured interviews were based on a topic guide.

Results

Participants’ characteristics were representative of the clinical and demographic characteristics of the trial group. Their mean age was 44 years, half were male, and three‐quarters had had epilepsy for over 10 years and had experienced one or more seizures in the previous month. Participants valued the opportunity to meet ‘people like them’. Structured learning methods encouraged them to share and compare feelings and experience. Specific benefits included: overcoming the sense of ‘being alone’ and improving self‐acceptance through meeting people with similar experience. Over half reported that this, and comparison of attitudes and experience, helped them to improve their confidence to talk openly, and make changes in health behaviours.

Conclusions

People feel socially isolated in long‐term poorly controlled epilepsy. They gain confidence and self‐acceptance from interactive groups. Expert‐facilitated courses that encourage experiential learning can help people learn from each other, and this may enhance self‐efficacy and behaviour change.

The impact of self-efficacy, alexithymia and multiple traumas on posttraumatic stress disorder and psychiatric co-morbidity following epileptic seizures: a moderated mediation analysis

This study investigated the incidence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and psychiatric co-morbidity following epileptic seizure, whether alexithymia mediated the relationship between self-efficacy and psychiatric outcomes, and whether the mediational effect was moderated by the severity of PTSD from other traumas. Seventy-one (M=31, F=40) people with a diagnosis of epilepsy recruited from support groups in the United Kingdom completed the Posttraumatic Stress Diagnostic Scale, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 and the Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale. They were compared with 71 people (M=29, F=42) without epilepsy. For people with epilepsy, 51% and 22% met the diagnostic criteria for post-epileptic seizure PTSD and for PTSD following one other traumatic life event respectively. For the control group, 24% met the diagnostic criteria for PTSD following other traumatic life events. The epilepsy group reported significantly more anxiety and depression than the control. Partial least squares (PLS) analysis showed that self-efficacy was significantly correlated with alexithymia, post-epileptic seizure PTSD and psychiatric co-morbidity. Alexithymia was also significantly correlated with post-epileptic seizure PTSD and psychiatric co-morbidity. Mediation analyses confirmed that alexithymia mediated the path between self-efficacy and post-epileptic seizure PTSD and psychiatric co-morbidity. Moderated mediation also confirmed that self-efficacy and PTSD from one other trauma moderated the effect of alexithymia on outcomes. To conclude, people can develop posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms and psychiatric co-morbidity following epileptic seizure. These psychiatric outcomes are closely linked with their belief in personal competence to deal with stressful situations and regulate their own functioning, to process rather than defend against distressing emotions, and with the degree of PTSD from other traumas.

Can an epilepsy nurse specialist-led self-management intervention reduce attendance at emergency departments and promote well-being for people with severe epilepsy? A non-randomised trial with a nested qualitative phase

Objectives

To (1) describe the characteristics and service use of people with established epilepsy (PWE) who attend the emergency department (ED); (2) evaluate the economic impact of PWE who attend the ED; (3) determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an epilepsy nurse specialist (ENS)-led self-management intervention plus treatment as usual (TAU) compared with TAU alone in reducing ED use and promoting well-being; (4) describe patients' views of the intervention; and (5) explore their reasons for attending the ED.

Design

Non-randomised trial with nested qualitative study.

Setting

The EDs of three inner London hospitals. The EDs each offer similar services and support a similar local population, which made a comparison of patient outcomes reasonable.

Participants

Adults diagnosed with epilepsy for ≥ 1 year were prospectively identified from the EDs by presenting symptom/discharge diagnosis. We recruited 85 of 315 patients with 44 forming the intervention group and 41 the comparison group.

Intervention

Intervention participants were offered two one-to-one outpatient sessions delivered by an ENS who aimed to optimise self-management skills and knowledge of appropriate emergency service use. The first session lasted for 45–60 minutes and the second for 30 minutes.

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome was the number of ED visits that participants reported making over the 6 months preceding the 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were visits reported at the 6-month follow-up and scores on psychosocial measures.

Results

In the year preceding recruitment, the 85 participants together made 270 ED visits. The frequency of their visits was positively skewed, with 61% having attended multiple times. The mean number of visits per participant was 3.1 [standard deviation (SD) 3.6] and the median was two (interquartile range 1–4). Mean patient service cost was £2355 (SD £2455). Compared with findings in the general epilepsy population, participants experienced more seizures and had greater anxiety, lower epilepsy knowledge and greater perceived stigma. Their outpatient care was, however, consistent with National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence recommendations. In total, 81% of participants were retained at the 6- and 12-month follow-ups, and 80% of participants offered the intervention attended. Using intention-to-treat analyses, including those adjusted for baseline differences, we found no significant effect of the intervention on ED use at the 6-month follow-up [adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 3.28] or the 12-month follow-up (adjusted IRR 1.92, 95% CI 0.68 to 5.41), nor on any psychosocial outcomes. Because they spent less time as inpatients, however, the average service cost of intervention participants over follow-up was less than that of TAU participants (adjusted difference £558, 95% CI –£2409 to £648). Lower confidence in managing epilepsy and more felt stigma at baseline best predicted more ED visits over follow-up. Interviews revealed that patients generally attended because they had no family, friend or colleague nearby who had the confidence to manage a seizure. Most participants receiving the intervention valued it, including being given information on epilepsy and an opportunity to talk about their feelings. Those reporting most ED use at baseline perceived the most benefit.

Conclusions

At baseline, > 60% of participants who had attended an ED in the previous year had reattended in the same year. In total, 50% of their health service costs were accounted for by ED use and admissions. Low confidence in their ability to manage their epilepsy and a greater sense of stigma predicted frequent attendance. The intervention did not lead to a reduction in ED use but did not cost more, partly because those receiving the intervention had shorter average hospital stays. The most common reason reported by PWE for attending an ED was the lack of someone nearby with sufficient experience of managing a seizure. Those who attended an ED frequently and received the intervention were more likely to report that the intervention helped them. Our findings on predictors of ED use clarify what causes ED use and suggest that future interventions might focus more on patients' perceptions of stigma and on their confidence in managing epilepsy. If addressed, ED visits might be reduced and efficiency savings generated.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN06469947.

Funding

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full inHealth Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 1, No. 9. See the HSDR programme website for further project information.

Epilepsy mortality and risk factors for death in epilepsy: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Epilepsy is an important cause of amenable mortality but risk factors for death in epilepsy are not well understood.

AIM

To evaluate trends in epilepsy mortality in a large population and identify risk factors for death in epilepsy.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Nested case-control study in the UK, using data from the General Practice Research Database (GPRD) from 1993 to 2007.

METHOD

Participants were included if they had ever been diagnosed with epilepsy and prescribed anticonvulsant drugs. Trends in all-cause mortality in persons with epilepsy in the GPRD were compared with death registrations with epilepsy as the underlying cause. A nested case-control study was implemented to compare participants with epilepsy who died with those who did not die.

RESULTS

The prevalence of epilepsy increased from 9 per 1000 in 1993 to 12 per 1000 in 2007, and epilepsy deaths also increased in this period. In a nested case-control study, mortality was associated with: recorded alcohol problems (odds ratio [OR] 2.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.25 to 3.89, P<0.001); having collected the last anticonvulsant prescription 90-182 days previously (OR 1.83, CI = 1.66 to 2.03, P<0.001); having an injury in the previous year (OR 1.41, 95% CI = 1.30 to 1.53, P<0.001), and having been treated for depression (OR 1.39, 95% CI = 1.28 to 1.50, P<0.001). In data available from 2004 onwards, being recorded seizure free in the previous 12 months was associated with lower mortality (OR 0.78, 95% CI = 0.71 to 0.86, P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Mortality with epilepsy appears to be increasing. Patients who have alcohol problems, do not collect repeat prescriptions for anticonvulsant drugs, have recent injuries, or have been treated for depression may be at increased risk of death; patients who remain seizure free over 12 months are at a lower risk.

Beyond the monthly seizure count

The Social Causes of Inequality in Epilepsy and Developing a Rehabilitation Strategy: A U.K.-Based Analysis. Ridsdale L. Epilepsia 2009;50(10):2175–2179. A rehabilitation approach has been adopted for many long-term neurologic conditions, but not for epilepsy. The disabilities associated with epilepsy are cognitive, psychological, and social, which are not as readily identified by medical doctors as are physical disabilities. A rehabilitation approach moves the emphasis from a medically driven process to a focus on the personal, social, and physical context of long-term illness. It is suggested that a missed opportunity for education and support for self-management occurs after diagnosis. This results in disadvantage to those whose educational level and knowledge of epilepsy are low. People who do not achieve epilepsy control may then experience higher levels of psychological distress, and a negative cycle of loss of self-efficacy, poor epilepsy control, social disadvantage, and disability. Rehabilitation services have benefited communities surrounding centers of excellence. Not so in epilepsy. Despite centers of excellence, areas with deprivation have higher than national average levels of patients reporting a seizure in the prior year, and higher emergency hospital admissions. Specialists working in partnership with general practitioners (GPs) and practice nurses can do more to increase participation and reduce distress for people with epilepsy. When available, GPs and nurses with special interest in epilepsy promote integrated services. Primary–secondary networks are likely to be more effective in preventing downward drift. This requires evaluation.