Hill Chloe E, Schwartz Hannah, Dahodwala Nabila, Litt Brian, Davis Kathryn A
Department of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Department of Biology, Emory University, 201 Dowman Drive, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA.
Epilepsy Behav. 2017 Sep;74:64-68. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2017.06.029. Epub 2017 Jul 17.
This study investigated continuity of neurological care for patients discharged from the epilepsy monitoring unit (EMU) with a diagnosis of psychogenic nonepileptic spells (PNES). Because PNES are seizure-like episodes that cannot be explained by abnormal electrical brain activity, they are challenging for patients to understand and accept. Consequently, after diagnosis, patients commonly fail to start recommended psychotherapy and instead pursue redundant medical care. As consistent relationships with healthcare providers may help, we instituted standard follow-up for patients diagnosed with PNES.
We performed a retrospective observational cohort study of adults diagnosed with PNES in our EMU. In November 2013, we began routine scheduling of postdischarge follow-up neurology appointments. We compared preintervention (November 2010-October 2013) and postintervention (November 2013-May 2016) cohorts with regard to clinic attendance, understanding the diagnosis, compliance with recommendations, and event frequency.
We identified 55 patients in the preintervention cohort and 123 patients in the postintervention cohort. We successfully implemented the intended practice changes; more patients had follow-up scheduled by discharge (preintervention 2% vs. postintervention 36%, p<0.001), time to follow-up decreased (46days vs. 29, p=0.001), and providers more consistently queried understanding of diagnosis (38% vs. 67%, p=0.03). Explicit planning for continued care did not produce the anticipated patient-provider relationships, as follow-up in clinic was low (38% vs. 37%). For patients who attended clinic, the intervention did not improve establishment of psychiatric care, compliance with medication recommendations, understanding of diagnosis, or event frequency. The odds of reduced event frequency were nonsignificantly increased with understanding the diagnosis (OR 3.75, p=0.14). Recommending antiepileptic drug (AED) discontinuation was associated with increased odds of event freedom (OR 6.91, p<0.01).
Scheduling follow-up for patients diagnosed with PNES did not facilitate ongoing patient-provider relationships due to poor clinic attendance. As follow-up is unreliable, the inpatient visit is a critical window of opportunity for intervention.
本研究调查了从癫痫监测单元(EMU)出院的诊断为精神性非癫痫性发作(PNES)患者的神经科护理连续性。由于PNES是不能用脑电活动异常解释的癫痫样发作,患者理解和接受起来具有挑战性。因此,诊断后患者通常未能开始推荐的心理治疗,而是寻求多余的医疗护理。由于与医疗服务提供者保持持续关系可能会有所帮助,我们为诊断为PNES的患者制定了标准随访方案。
我们对在我们的EMU中诊断为PNES的成年人进行了一项回顾性观察队列研究。2013年11月,我们开始对出院后的神经科随访预约进行常规安排。我们比较了干预前(2010年11月 - 2013年10月)和干预后(2013年11月 - 2016年5月)队列在门诊就诊情况、对诊断的理解、对建议的依从性以及发作频率方面的差异。
我们在干预前队列中确定了55名患者,在干预后队列中确定了123名患者。我们成功实施了预期的实践改变;更多患者在出院时安排了随访(干预前2% vs. 干预后36%,p<0.001),随访时间缩短(46天 vs. 29天,p = 0.001),并且医疗服务提供者更一致地询问对诊断的理解(38% vs. 67%,p = 0.03)。持续护理的明确规划并未产生预期的医患关系,因为门诊随访率较低(38% vs. 37%)。对于就诊的患者,干预并未改善精神科护理的建立、对药物治疗建议的依从性、对诊断的理解或发作频率。随着对诊断的理解,发作频率降低的几率虽有增加但无统计学意义(OR 3.75,p = 0.14)。建议停用抗癫痫药物(AED)与发作缓解几率增加相关(OR 6.91,p<0.01)。
由于门诊就诊率低,为诊断为PNES的患者安排随访并未促进持续的医患关系。由于随访不可靠,住院就诊是进行干预的关键时机窗口。