Risk model of seizure cluster or status epilepticus and intervention in the emergency department

C. Fernández Alonso , F. González Martínez , R. Alonso Avilés , M. Liñán López , M.E. Fuentes Ferrer , B. Gros Bañeres , on behalf of the ACESUR registry
{"title":"Risk model of seizure cluster or status epilepticus and intervention in the emergency department","authors":"C. Fernández Alonso ,&nbsp;F. González Martínez ,&nbsp;R. Alonso Avilés ,&nbsp;M. Liñán López ,&nbsp;M.E. Fuentes Ferrer ,&nbsp;B. Gros Bañeres ,&nbsp;on behalf of the ACESUR registry","doi":"10.1016/j.nrleng.2021.02.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To identify possible predictors of seizure cluster or status epilepticus (SE) and to evaluate whether these patients receive greater interventions in emergency departments.</p></div><div><h3>Methodology</h3><p>We conducted a secondary analysis of the ACESUR Registry, a multipurpose, observational, prospective, multicentre registry of adult patients with seizures from 18 emergency departments. Clinical and care-related variables were collected. We identified risk factors and risk models for seizure cluster or SE and assessed the effect of interventions by prehospital emergency services and the hospital emergency department.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We identified a total of 186 (28%) patients from the ACESUR registry with seizure cluster (126 [19%]) or SE (60 [9%]); the remaining 478 patients (72%) had isolated seizures. The risk model for seizure cluster or SE in the emergency department included Charlson Comorbidity Index scores ≥ 3 (OR: 1.60; 95% CI, 1.05–2.46; <em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->.030), ≥ 2 habitual antiepileptic drugs (OR: 2.29; 95% CI, 1.49–3.51; <em>P</em> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->.001), and focal seizures (OR: 1.56; 95% CI, 1.05–2.32; <em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->.027). The area under the curve of the model was 0.735 (95% CI, 0.693–0.777; <em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->.021). Patients with seizure cluster and SE received more aggressive interventions both by prehospital emergency services (OR: 2.89; 95% CI, 1.91–4.36; <em>P</em> <em>&lt;</em> <!-->.001) and at the emergency department (OR: 4.41; 95% CI, 2.69–7.22; <em>P</em> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->.001).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This risk model may be of prognostic value in identifying adult patients at risk of presenting seizure cluster or SE in the emergency department. In our sample, these patients received more aggressive treatment than adult patients with isolated seizures before arriving at hospital, and even more so in the emergency department.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":94155,"journal":{"name":"Neurologia","volume":"39 1","pages":"Pages 20-28"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2173580823000743/pdfft?md5=3c9e19ec1e82c1b225d6a21ba15a41a0&pid=1-s2.0-S2173580823000743-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2173580823000743","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

To identify possible predictors of seizure cluster or status epilepticus (SE) and to evaluate whether these patients receive greater interventions in emergency departments.

Methodology

We conducted a secondary analysis of the ACESUR Registry, a multipurpose, observational, prospective, multicentre registry of adult patients with seizures from 18 emergency departments. Clinical and care-related variables were collected. We identified risk factors and risk models for seizure cluster or SE and assessed the effect of interventions by prehospital emergency services and the hospital emergency department.

Results

We identified a total of 186 (28%) patients from the ACESUR registry with seizure cluster (126 [19%]) or SE (60 [9%]); the remaining 478 patients (72%) had isolated seizures. The risk model for seizure cluster or SE in the emergency department included Charlson Comorbidity Index scores ≥ 3 (OR: 1.60; 95% CI, 1.05–2.46; P = .030), ≥ 2 habitual antiepileptic drugs (OR: 2.29; 95% CI, 1.49–3.51; P < .001), and focal seizures (OR: 1.56; 95% CI, 1.05–2.32; P = .027). The area under the curve of the model was 0.735 (95% CI, 0.693–0.777; P = .021). Patients with seizure cluster and SE received more aggressive interventions both by prehospital emergency services (OR: 2.89; 95% CI, 1.91–4.36; P < .001) and at the emergency department (OR: 4.41; 95% CI, 2.69–7.22; P < .001).

Conclusions

This risk model may be of prognostic value in identifying adult patients at risk of presenting seizure cluster or SE in the emergency department. In our sample, these patients received more aggressive treatment than adult patients with isolated seizures before arriving at hospital, and even more so in the emergency department.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
癫痫群发或癫痫状态的风险模型及急诊科的干预措施
方法我们对 ACESUR 登记进行了二次分析,这是一项多用途、观察性、前瞻性、多中心登记,登记对象为 18 个急诊科的成年癫痫发作患者。我们收集了临床和护理相关变量。我们确定了癫痫群发或SE的风险因素和风险模型,并评估了院前急救服务和医院急诊科干预措施的效果。结果我们从ACESUR登记处共发现186例(28%)患者有癫痫群发(126例[19%])或SE(60例[9%]);其余478例患者(72%)有孤立癫痫发作。急诊科癫痫群发或SE的风险模型包括Charlson合并症指数评分≥3(OR:1.60;95% CI,1.05-2.46;P = .030)、习惯性抗癫痫药物≥2(OR:2.29;95% CI,1.49-3.51;P <;.001)和局灶性癫痫发作(OR:1.56;95% CI,1.05-2.32;P = .027)。模型的曲线下面积为 0.735 (95% CI, 0.693-0.777; P = .021)。院前急救服务(OR:2.89;95% CI,1.91-4.36;P <;.001)和急诊科(OR:4.41;95% CI,2.69-7.22;P <;.001)均对癫痫发作群集和 SE 患者采取了更积极的干预措施。在我们的样本中,这些患者在入院前接受的治疗比单独发作的成年患者更积极,在急诊科接受的治疗甚至更积极。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
53 weeks
期刊最新文献
Sporadic fatal insomnia: a rapidly progressive phenotype resembling progressive supranuclear palsy. Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome following adenovirus vector-based vaccines to prevent COVID-19: Epidemiology and clinical presentation in Spain. Incidence and prevalence of multiple sclerosis in Spain: a systematic review Functional outcomes of patients with NORSE and FIRES treated with immunotherapy: A systematic review Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB-E) and normative values in a representative adult population sample
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1