Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wbk2r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-19T05:49:56.589Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Seizure Control as an Indicator of Therapeutic Usefulness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2014

Samuel Wiebe
Samuel Wiebe*
Affiliation:
From the Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University of Western, Ontario, London, ON Canada
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Seizure control, in addition to quality of life, is an important outcome after epilepsy surgery. However, seizure measurement is not straightforward. We explore some important difficulties in obtaining unbiased, reliable estimates of seizure frequency, and discuss aspects of data analysis as it pertains to validity and clinical meaningfulness. As seizure severity is an integral component of seizure outcome assessment, we discuss aspects of measurement of this outcome. Suggestions for improving validity are offered, based on the literature and on methodological common sense. Finally, we look at the Canadian perspective and the potential for adopting methodology that allows for data pooling and for more powerful analyses.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences , Volume 27 , Issue S1: Canadian Temporal Lobe Epilepsy Surgery Workshop , May 2000 , pp. S97 - S105
Copyright
Copyright © The Canadian Journal of Neurological 2000

References

1. Chadwick, D. Measuring antiepileptic therapies: the patient vs the physician viewpoint. Neurology 1994; 44: S24-S28.Google ScholarPubMed
2. Vickrey, BG, Hays, RD, Engel, J Jr., et al. Outcome assessment for epilepsy surgery: the impact of measuring health-related quality of life. Ann Neurol 1995; 37: 158–166.Google Scholar
3. Jacoby, A, Baker, GA, Steen, N, Potts, P, Chadwick, DW. The clinical course of epilepsy and its psychosocial correlates: findings from a U.K. community study. Epilepsia 1996; 37: 148–161.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Jacoby, A. Epilepsy and the quality of everyday life. Findings from a study of people with well-controlled epilepsy. Soc Sci Med 1992; 34: 657–666.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Taylor, DC. Epilepsy as a chronic illness: remediating its impact. In: Engel, J Jr., ed. Surgical Treatment of the Epilepsies. 2nd edit. New York: Raven Press, 1993: 11–22.Google Scholar
6. Vickrey, BG, Hays, RD, Rausch, R, et al. Quality of life of epilepsy surgery patients as compared with outpatients with hypertension, diabetes, heart disease, and/or depressive symptoms. Epilepsia 1994; 35: 597–607.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7. Smith, DF, Baker, GA, Davies, G, Dewey, M, Chadwick, DW. Outcomes of add-on treatment with lamotrigine in partial epilepsy. Epilepsia 1993; 34(2): 312–322.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Marson, AG, Chadwick, DW. How easy are randomized controlled trials in epilepsy to find on medline? The sensitivity and precision of two medline searches. Epilepsia 1996; 37: 377–380.Google Scholar
9. A global survey on epilepsy surgery, 1980-1990: a report by the Commission on Neurosurgery of Epilepsy, the International League Against Epilepsy. Epilepsia 1997; 38: 249–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Engel, J Jr.. Outcome with respect to epileptic seizures. In: Engel, JJ. ed. Surgical Treatment of the Epilepsies. 1st edit. New York: Raven Press, 1987: 553–572.Google Scholar
11. Engel, J Jr., Van Ness, PC, Rasmussen, TB, Ojemann, LM. Outcome with respect to epileptic seizures. In: Engel, JJr. ed. Surgical Treatment of the Epilepsies. 2nd edit. New York: Raven Press, 1993: 609–621.Google Scholar
12. Wyler, AR, Hermann, BP, Somes, G. Extent of medial temporal resection on outcome from anterior temporal lobectomy: a randomized prospective study. Neurosurgery 1995; 37: 982–990.Google Scholar
13. Dasheiff, RM, Ryan, CW, Lave, JR. Epilepsy brain surgery: a Pittsburgh perspective. Seizure 1994; 3: 197–207.Google Scholar
14. Wiebe, S, Blume, W T, Girvin, JP. Methodological issues in randomised controlled trials of epilepsy surgery: the EESTLE trial. Epilepsia 1997; 38: S246.Google Scholar
15. Guyatt, GH, Kirshner, B, Jaeschke, R. Measuring health status: what are the necessary measurement properties? J Clin Epidemiol 1992; 45: 1341–1345.Google Scholar
16. Neugebauer, R. Reliability of seizure diaries in adult epileptic patients. Neuroepidemiology 1989; 8: 228–233.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17. Glueckauf, RL, Girvin, JP, Braun, JR, Bochen, JL. Consistency of seizure frequency estimates across time, methods, and observers. Health Psychol 1990; 9: 427–434.Google Scholar
18. Bland, JM, Altman, DG. Measurement error and correlation coefficients. Br Med J 1996; 313: 41–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19. Koran, LM. Increasing the reliability of clinical data and judgments. Ann Clin Res 1976; 8: 69–73.Google Scholar
20. Marshall, BJ, Hoffman, SR, Babadzhov, V, Babadzhov, M McCallum, R. The automatic patient symptom monitor (APSM): a voice mail system for clinical research. Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care 1993; 32–36.Google Scholar
21. Hopkins, A, Davies, P, Dobson, C. Mathematical models of patterns of seizures. Their use in the evaluation of drugs. Arch Neurol 1985; 42: 463–467.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22. Shofer, JB, Temkin, NR. Comparison of alternative outcome measures for antiepileptic drug trials. Arch Neurol 1986; 43: 877–881.Google Scholar
23. Salanova, V, Andermann, F, Rasmussen, T, Olivier, A, Quesney, L. The running down phenomenon in temporal lobe epilepsy. Brain 1996; 119: 989–996.Google Scholar
24. Engel, J Jr.. Outcome with respect to epileptic seizures. In: Engel, JJ. ed. Surgical Treatment of the Epilepsies. 1st edit. New York: Raven Press, 1987: 553–572.Google Scholar
25. Leppik, IE, Dreifuss, FE, Pledger, GW, et al. Felbamate for partial seizures: results of a controlled clinical trial. Neurology 1991; 41(11): 1785–1789.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26. Hauser, WA, Hesdorffer, DC. Prognosis. In: Epilepsy: Frequency, Causes, and Consequences. Maryland: Epilepsy Foundation of America, 1990: 197–243.Google Scholar
27. Manford, M, Hart, YM, Sander, JW, Shorvon, SD. National General Practice Study of Epilepsy (NGPSE): partial seizure patterns in a general population. Neurology 1992; 42: 1911–1917.Google ScholarPubMed
28. Hauser, WA, Rich, SS, Annegers, JF, Anderson, VE. Seizure recurrence after a 1st unprovoked seizure: an extended follow-up. Neurology 1990; 40: 1163–1170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
29. Dooley, J, Gordon, K, Camfield, P, Camfield, C, Smith E.Discontinuation of anticonvulsant therapy in children free of seizures for 1 year: a prospective study. Neurology 1996; 46: 969–974.Google Scholar
30. Randomised study of antiepileptic drug withdrawal in patients in remission. Medical Research Council Antiepileptic Drug Withdrawal Study Group. Lancet 1991; 337: 1175–1180.Google Scholar
31. Elwes, RD, Johnson, AL, Shorvon, SD, Reynolds, EH. The prognosis for seizure control in newly diagnosed epilepsy. N Engl J Med 1984; 311: 944–947.Google Scholar
32. Cockerell, OC, Johnson, AL, Sander, JWAS, Hart, YM, Shorvon, SD. Remission of epilepsy: results from the National General Practice Study of Epilepsy. Lancet 1995; 346: 140–144.Google Scholar
33. Eslava Cobos, J. Objective measure of treatment outcome in epilepsy. Epilepsia 1996; 37: 572–576.Google Scholar
34. Bourgeois, B, Leppik, IE, Sackellares, JC, et al. Felbamate: a double-blind controlled trial in patients undergoing presurgi cal evaluation of partial seizures. Neurology 1993; 43: 693–696.Google Scholar
35. Cramer, JA, Smith, DB, Mattson, RH, et al. A method of quantification for the evaluation of antiepileptic drug therapy. Neurology 1983; 33(Suppl 1): 26–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
36. Mattson, RH, Cramer, JA, Collins, JF. A comparison of valproate with carbamazepine for the treatment of complex partial seizures and secondarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures in adults. The Department of Veterans Affairs Epilepsy Cooperative Study No. 264 Group. N Engl J Med 1992; 327: 765–771.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
37. Lammers, MW, Hekster, YA, Keyser, A, et al. Clinimetric analysis of treatment objectives and clinical status: individualized treatment in epileptic patients. Epilepsia 1994; 35: 1271–1278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
38. Smith, D, Chadwick, D, Baker, G, Davis, G, Dewey, M. Seizure severity and the quality of life. Epilepsia 1993; 34 Suppl 5: S31-S35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
39. Baker, GA, Smith, DF, Dewey, M, Morrow, J. The development of a seizure severity scale as an outcome measure in epilepsy. Epilepsy Res 1991; 8: 245–251.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
40. Duncan, JS, Sander, JWAS. The Chalfont Seizure Severity Scale. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1991; 54: 873–876.Google Scholar
41. O’Donoghue, MF, Duncan, JS, Sander, JW. The National Hospital Seizure Severity Scale: a further development of the Chalfont Seizure Severity Scale. Epilepsia 1996; 37: 563–571.Google Scholar
42. Carpay, JA, Vermuelen, J, Stroink, H, et al. Seizure severity in children with epilepsy: a parent-completed scale compared with clinical data. Epilepsia 1997; 38: 346–352.Google Scholar
43. McLachlan, RS. The Canadian Epilepsy Database and Registry. Can J Neurol Sci 1998; 25: S27-S31.Google Scholar
44. Siegel, JE, Weinstein, MC, Torrance, GW. Reporting cost-effectiveness studies and results. In: Gold, MR, Siegel, JE, Russell, LB, et al. eds. Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996: 276–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar