Search

Aim: To compare the efficacy of the main methodologies in attaining sleep and electroencephalography (EEG) abnormalities in children with a view to producing recommendations on best practice.Method: Fifty-one UK centres participated. Methods for sleep induction (sleep deprivation, melatonin, and combined sleep deprivation/melatonin) were compared. Data pertaining to demographics, achievement of stage II sleep, and recording characteristics (duration of study, presence of epileptiform activity in awake/sleep states) were prospectively collected for consecutive patients in November and December 2013.Results: Five hundred and sixty-five patients were included. Age range was 1 years to 17 years (mean 7y 10mo), 27.7 per cent had an underlying neurobehavioural condition. Stage II sleep was achieved in 69 per cent of sleep deprived studies, 77 per cent of melatonin studies, and 90 per cent of combined intervention studies (p<0.001, χ2 ). In children who slept, there was no difference between the three interventions in eliciting epileptiform discharges. In children who did not sleep, epileptiform abnormalities were seen more often than after sleep deprivation alone (p=0.02, χ2 ). Seizures were rare.Interpretation: Combined sleep deprivation/melatonin is more effective than either method alone in achieving sleep. The occurrence of epileptiform activity during sleep is broadly similar across the three groups. We recommend the combined intervention to induce sleep for paediatric EEG.What This Paper Adds: Combined sleep deprivation/melatonin is more effective in achieving sleep than either sleep deprivation or melatonin alone. Sleep latency is shorter with combined sleep deprivation/melatonin. When children do sleep, there is no difference in the occurrence of epileptiform abnormalities between different induction methods. Seizures are rare in sleep electroencephalography recordings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Although differences in illness perceptions between neurologists and patients with epilepsy or psychogenic nonepileptic seizures ( PNES) are likely to be clinically relevant, this is the first study to attempt a direct comparison. In addition, this study compares the illness perceptions of patients with epilepsy with those of patients with PNES. Methods Thirty-four patients with epilepsy, 40 patients with PNES, and 45 neurologists were recruited. All patient participants completed versions of the illness perception questionnaire revised ( IPQ-R) adapted for epileptic or nonepileptic seizure disorders, single-item symptom attribution question ( SAQ), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale ( HADS), Quality of Life in Epilepsy-31 (QOLIE-31), and Liverpool Seizure Severity Scale ( LSSS). Participating neurologists completed two versions of the IPQ-R and two SAQs for epileptic and nonepileptic seizure disorders. Key Findings Differences in illness perceptions between patients with epilepsy and patients with PNES were minor compared to those between patients with either seizure disorder and neurologists. Neurologists considered both seizure disorders more treatable and more amenable to personal control than did the patients themselves. Neurologists had much more polarized views of the etiology of both conditions; whereas patients mostly considered the causes of their seizure disorders as partially 'physical' and partially 'psychological,' neurologists perceived epilepsy as an essentially 'physical' and PNES as a clearly 'psychological' problem. Significance There are considerable differences between the illness perceptions of patients with seizure disorders and their doctors, which could represent barriers to successful clinical management. In particular, a discrepancy between neurologists' and patients' beliefs about the personal control that patients may be able to exert over PNES could contribute to the confusion or anger some patients report after the diagnosis has been explained to them. Furthermore, patients' endorsement of 'physical' causes for PNES may reflect an unrealistic faith in the effectiveness of 'physical' treatments and could be a cause of tension in patients' relationship with their doctor, for instance when the neurologist attempts to withdraw antiepileptic drug treatment or refers patients for psychological interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hyperventilation-induced high-amplitude rhythmic slow activity with altered awareness (HIHARS) is increasingly being identified in children and is thought to be an age-related non-epileptic electrographic phenomenon. We retrospectively investigated the clinical outcome in 15 children (six males, nine females) with HIHARS (mean age 7y, SD 1y 11mo; range 4y 6mo-11y). The presenting feature in 11 cases was blank spells - two of these children also had generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS) - and in one individual the main concern was deteriorating school performance. Three children had symptoms suggestive of focal motor seizures. Of the nine children presenting solely with blank spells, further follow-up (mean duration 18mo, SD 21mo) revealed full resolution of symptoms in six, but three had persistent symptoms. In our study, the symptoms of children with HIHARS presenting with blank spells in isolation appeared to resolve spontaneously and did not evolve into convulsive seizures or other paroxysmal events considered to be clearly epileptic. Children (with HIHARS) who presented with clinical features suggestive of GTCS or focal motor seizures (with or without blank spells) and/or had epileptiform discharges on interictal electroencephalography were subsequently diagnosed with epilepsy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]