Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Continuous EEG Utilization.

PURPOSE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has significantly impacted healthcare delivery and utilization. The aim of this article was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on in-hospital continuous electroencephalography (cEEG) utilization and identify areas for process improvement. METHODS: A 38-question web-based survey was distributed to site principal investigators of the Critical Care EEG Monitoring Research Consortium, and institutional contacts for the Neurodiagnostic Credentialing and Accreditation Board. The survey addressed the following aspects of cEEG utilization: (1) general center characteristics, (2) cEEG utilization and review, (3) staffing and workflow, and (4) health impact on EEG technologists. RESULTS: The survey was open from June 12, 2020 to June 30, 2020 and distributed to 174 centers with 79 responses (45.4%). Forty centers were located in COVID-19 hotspots. Fifty-seven centers (72.1%) reported cEEG volume reduction. Centers in the Northeast were most likely to report cEEG volume reduction (odds ratio [OR] 7.19 [1.53-33.83]; P = 0.012). Additionally, centers reporting decrease in outside hospital transfers reported cEEG volume reduction; OR 21.67 [4.57-102.81]; P ≤ 0.0001. Twenty-six centers (32.91%) reported reduction in EEG technologist coverage. Eighteen centers had personal protective equipment shortages for EEG technologists. Technologists at these centers were more likely to quarantine for suspected or confirmed COVID-19; OR 3.14 [1.01-9.63]; P = 0.058. CONCLUSIONS: There has been a widespread reduction in cEEG volume during the pandemic. Given the anticipated duration of the pandemic and the importance of cEEG in managing hospitalized patients, methods to optimize use need to be prioritized to provide optimal care. Because the survey provides a cross-sectional assessment, follow-up studies can determine the long-term impact of the pandemic on cEEG utilization.

Clinical Neurophysiology Fellowship Program Directors Survey on a Standardized Fellowship Match Process: A Call for Action.

PURPOSE: To survey US Clinical Neurophysiology (CNP) fellowship program directors on the nature of CNP and related training programs, current recruitment cycle, and views for a standardized process. METHODS: A 23-question electronic survey was sent to all 93 US Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited CNP fellowship program directors from December 2020 to January 2021. RESULTS: The response rate was 60%. There was great variability in the number of CNP positions and CNP tracks offered. The following tracks were identified: 48% EEG dominant, 26% EMG dominant, 22% split equally between EEG and EMG, and 2% and 1% were neurophysiologic intraoperative monitoring and autonomic dominant, respectively. Of the responding institutions, 43% offered a second year of training options to CNP fellows, mainly in conjunction with Epilepsy fellowship, which was pursued by 25% of CNP fellows. Many programs indicated flexibility in their design between different CNP tracks or between CNP and other related training programs based on the available candidates. The median percentage of CNP fellowship positions filled over the last 5 years was 80%, and there was great variation in the recruitment timeline across institutions. Overall, 86% of program directors favored a universal timeline and 71% favored a formal match for CNP. The respondents were split between an independent CNP match (39%) and joining the initiatives of affiliate societies on a standardized process (61%). CONCLUSIONS: There is significant heterogeneity in the makeup of the CNP fellowship programs and the recruitment process. The majority of CNP program directors are in favor of standardization of the recruitment process.

Interictal Epileptiform Discharge Detection in EEG in Different Practice Settings.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of the study was to measure the performance of academic and private practice (PP) neurologists in detecting interictal epileptiform discharges in routine scalp EEG recordings. METHODS: Thirty-five EEG scorers (EEGers) participated (19 academic and 16 PP) and marked the location of ETs in 200 30-second EEG segments using a web-based EEG annotation system. All participants provided board certification status, years of Epilepsy Fellowship Training (EFT), and years in practice. The Persyst P13 automated IED detection algorithm was also run on the EEG segments for comparison. RESULTS: Academic EEGers had an average of 1.66 years of EFT versus 0.50 years of EFT for PP EEGers (P < 0.0001) and had higher rates of board certification. Inter-rater agreement for the 35 EEGers was fair. There was higher performance for EEGers in academics, with at least 1.5 years of EFT, and with American Board of Clinical Neurophysiology and American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology-E specialty board certification. The Persyst P13 algorithm at its default setting (perception value = 0.4) did not perform as well at the EEGers, but at substantially higher perception value settings, the algorithm performed almost as well human experts. CONCLUSIONS: Inter-rater agreement among EEGers in both academic and PP settings varies considerably. Practice location, years of EFT, and board certification are associated with significantly higher performance for IED detection in routine scalp EEG. Continued medical education of PP neurologists and neurologists without EFT is needed to improve routine scalp EEG interpretation skills. The performance of automated detection algorithms is approaching that of human experts.

Randomized trial of lacosamide versus fosphenytoin for nonconvulsive seizures.

OBJECTIVE: The optimal treatment of nonconvulsive seizures in critically ill patients is uncertain. We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of the antiseizure drugs lacosamide (LCM) and fosphenytoin (fPHT) in this population. METHODS: The TRENdS (Treatment of Recurrent Electrographic Nonconvulsive Seizures) study was a noninferiority, prospective, multicenter, randomized treatment trial of patients diagnosed with nonconvulsive seizures (NCSs) by continuous electroencephalography (cEEG). Treatment was randomized to intravenous (IV) LCM 400mg or IV fPHT 20mg phenytoin equivalents/kg. The primary endpoint was absence of electrographic seizures for 24 hours as determined by 1 blinded EEG reviewer. The frequency with which NCS control was achieved in each arm was compared, and the 90% confidence interval (CI) was determined. Noninferiority of LCM to fPHT was to be concluded if the lower bound of the CI for relative risk was >0.8. RESULTS: Seventy-four subjects were enrolled (37 LCM, 37 fPHT) between August 21, 2012 and December 20, 2013. The mean age was 63.6 years; 38 were women. Seizures were controlled in 19 of 30 (63.3%) subjects in the LCM arm and 16 of 32 (50%) subjects in the fPHT arm. LCM was noninferior to fPHT (p = 0.02), with a risk ratio of 1.27 (90% CI = 0.88-1.83). Treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were similar in both arms, occurring in 9 of 35 (25.7%) LCM and 9 of 37 (24.3%) fPHT subjects (p = 1.0). INTERPRETATION: LCM was noninferior to fPHT in controlling NCS, and TEAEs were comparable. LCM can be considered an alternative to fPHT in the treatment of NCSs detected on cEEG. Ann Neurol 2018;83:1174-1185.

Association of an Electroencephalography-Based Risk Score With Seizure Probability in Hospitalized Patients.

Importance: Continuous electroencephalography (EEG) use in critically ill patients is expanding. There is no validated method to combine risk factors and guide clinicians in assessing seizure risk. Objective: To use seizure risk factors from EEG and clinical history to create a simple scoring system associated with the probability of seizures in patients with acute illness. Design, Setting, and Participants: We used a prospective multicenter (Emory University Hospital, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Yale University Hospital) database containing clinical and electrographic variables on 5427 continuous EEG sessions from eligible patients if they had continuous EEG for clinical indications, excluding epilepsy monitoring unit admissions. We created a scoring system model to estimate seizure risk in acutely ill patients undergoing continuous EEG. The model was built using a new machine learning method (RiskSLIM) that is designed to produce accurate, risk-calibrated scoring systems with a limited number of variables and small integer weights. We validated the accuracy and risk calibration of our model using cross-validation and compared its performance with models built with state-of-the-art logistic regression methods. The database was developed by the Critical Care EEG Research Consortium and used data collected over 3 years. The EEG variables were interpreted using standardized terminology by certified reviewers. Exposures: All patients had more than 6 hours of uninterrupted EEG recordings. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the average risk calibration error. Results: There were 5427 continuous EEGs performed on 4772 participants (2868 men, 49.9%; median age, 61 years) performed at 3 institutions, without further demographic stratification. Our final model, 2HELPS2B, had an area under the curve of 0.819 and average calibration error of 2.7% (95% CI, 2.0%-3.6%). It included 6 variables with the following point assignments: (1) brief (ictal) rhythmic discharges (B[I]RDs) (2 points); (2) presence of lateralized periodic discharges, lateralized rhythmic delta activity, or bilateral independent periodic discharges (1 point); (3) prior seizure (1 point); (4) sporadic epileptiform discharges (1 point); (5) frequency greater than 2.0 Hz for any periodic or rhythmic pattern (1 point); and (6) presence of "plus" features (superimposed, rhythmic, sharp, or fast activity) (1 point). The probable seizure risk of each score was 5% for a score of 0, 12% for a score of 1, 27% for a score of 2, 50% for a score of 3, 73% for a score of 4, 88% for a score of 5, and greater than 95% for a score of 6 or 7. Conclusions and Relevance: The 2HELPS2B model is a quick accurate tool to aid clinical judgment of the risk of seizures in critically ill patients.

Survey of the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to new-onset refractory status epilepticus.

PURPOSE: We conducted a survey of providers to assess for practice patterns in diagnosing and treating new-onset refractory status epilepticus (NORSE). NORSE is the occurrence of prolonged seizures that are not responsive to initial therapies in otherwise healthy individuals without obvious cause on initial presentation. This entity is thought to have multiple etiologies, including autoimmune. METHOD: A 29-question electronic survey was sent to providers included in the Neurocritical Care Society emailing list. Questions regarded responders' demographics, existing institutional practice protocols, diagnostic work-up, therapeutic management and expected outcomes in NORSE. Responses were collected from October 23, 2014, to November 25, 2014. RESULTS: There were 107 respondents out of 1334 (8%). CT head, continuous EEG, lumbar puncture and microbe serologies were suggested within 24h of presentation as part of a diagnostic work-up. MRI brain, autoimmune work-up (systemic and anti-neuronal antibodies) and cytology/flow cytometry were favored later in the course. About 25% of providers would never perform an autoimmune work-up in this setting. Initial treatment included up to 3 anticonvulsants (including one anesthetic), followed by additional anticonvulsants/anesthetics along with antimicrobials, followed by steroids, plasma exchange, hypothermia and ketogenic diet. Many respondents would never use IV immunoglobulin or steroid-sparing immunosuppressants (29% and 42%, respectively) for NORSE. CONCLUSIONS: This survey could serve as the foundation for development of a standardized approach for the diagnosis and treatment of NORSE.

Characteristics of EEG Interpreters Associated With Higher Interrater Agreement.

PURPOSE: The goal of the project is to determine characteristics of academic neurophysiologist EEG interpreters (EEGers), which predict good interrater agreement (IRA) and to determine the number of EEGers needed to develop an ideal standardized testing and training data set for epileptiform transient (ET) detection algorithms. METHODS: A three-phase scoring method was used. In phase 1, 19 EEGers marked the location of ETs in two hundred 30-second segments of EEG from 200 different patients. In phase 2, EEG events marked by at least 2 EEGers were annotated by 18 EEGers on a 5-point scale to indicate whether they were ETs. In phase 3, a third opinion was obtained from EEGers on any inconsistencies between phase 1 and phase 2 scoring. RESULTS: The IRA for the 18 EEGers was only fair. A select group of the EEGers had good IRA and the other EEGers had low IRA. Board certification by the American Board of Clinical Neurophysiology was associated with better IRA performance but other board certifications, years of fellowship training, and years of practice were not. As the number of EEGers used for scoring is increased, the amount of change in the consensus opinion decreases steadily and is quite low as the group size approaches 10. CONCLUSIONS: The IRA among EEGers varies considerably. The EEGers must be tested before use as scorers for ET annotation research projects. The American Board of Clinical Neurophysiology certification is associated with improved performance. The optimal size for a group of experts scoring ETs in EEG is probably in the 6 to 10 range.

Sensitivity of quantitative EEG for seizure identification in the intensive care unit.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the sensitivity of quantitative EEG (QEEG) for electrographic seizure identification in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: Six-hour EEG epochs chosen from 15 patients underwent transformation into QEEG displays. Each epoch was reviewed in 3 formats: raw EEG, QEEG + raw, and QEEG-only. Epochs were also analyzed by a proprietary seizure detection algorithm. Nine neurophysiologists reviewed raw EEGs to identify seizures to serve as the gold standard. Nine other neurophysiologists with experience in QEEG evaluated the epochs in QEEG formats, with and without concomitant raw EEG. Sensitivity and false-positive rates (FPRs) for seizure identification were calculated and median review time assessed. RESULTS: Mean sensitivity for seizure identification ranged from 51% to 67% for QEEG-only and 63%-68% for QEEG + raw. FPRs averaged 1/h for QEEG-only and 0.5/h for QEEG + raw. Mean sensitivity of seizure probability software was 26.2%-26.7%, with FPR of 0.07/h. Epochs with the highest sensitivities contained frequent, intermittent seizures. Lower sensitivities were seen with slow-frequency, low-amplitude seizures and epochs with rhythmic or periodic patterns. Median review times were shorter for QEEG (6 minutes) and QEEG + raw analysis (14.5 minutes) vs raw EEG (19 minutes; p = 0.00003). CONCLUSIONS: A panel of QEEG trends can be used by experts to shorten EEG review time for seizure identification with reasonable sensitivity and low FPRs. The prevalence of false detections confirms that raw EEG review must be used in conjunction with QEEG. Studies are needed to identify optimal QEEG trend configurations and the utility of QEEG as a screening tool for non-EEG personnel. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE REVIEW: This study provides Class II evidence that QEEG + raw interpreted by experts identifies seizures in patients in the ICU with a sensitivity of 63%-68% and FPR of 0.5 seizures per hour.

Ictal-interictal continuum: A proposed treatment algorithm.

The ictal-interictal continuum (IIC) is characterized by periodic and/or rhythmic EEG patterns that occur with relative high frequency in critically ill patients. Several studies have reported that some patterns seen within the continuum are independently associated with poor outcome. However there is no consensus regarding when to treat them or how aggressive treatment should be. In this review we examine peer-reviewed original scientific articles, guidelines and reviews indexed in PubMed and summarize current knowledge related to the ictal-interictal continuum. A treatment algorithm to guide management of critically ill patients with EEG patterns that fall along the IIC is proposed. The algorithm-based on best current practice in adults-takes into account associated clinical events, risk factors for developing seizures, response to medication trials and biomarkers of neuronal injury.

A standardized diagnostic approach and ongoing feedback improves outcome in psychogenic nonepileptic seizures.

INTRODUCTION: Psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES) are episodic alterations in behavior presumed to reflect a physical manifestation of underlying psychological distress. Standardized treatment approaches for PNES care are lacking. We evaluated common approaches to PNES management that do not require significant commitment of time and resources. METHODOLOGY: Patients with PNES established with video-EEG monitoring were randomized to one of the following three groups: 1) PNES diagnosis delivered per the discretion of the attending physician with advice to seek mental health assistance in the community (n=12), 2) scripted PNES diagnosis provided and inpatient psychiatry consult obtained (n=10), and 3) weekly follow-up phone calls made in addition to scripted diagnosis and inpatient psychiatry consultation (n=15). Reduction in event frequency measured at 8weeks following hospital discharge represented the primary outcome variable. Secondary variables analyzed included exploration of change in self-reported mood, quality of life, and healthcare utilization. RESULTS: No significant improvements were noted in patients simply given a PNES diagnosis and advised to seek outside care on any measure. In contrast, patients receiving a scripted diagnosis and psychiatric consultation demonstrated decreased PNES frequency accompanied by improved quality of life (QOL). Patients also receiving weekly phone calls not only demonstrated decreased PNES frequency and improvements in QOL but also exhibited improved mood. DISCUSSION: These findings demonstrate that providing diagnostic information regarding PNES is insufficient by itself to meaningfully affect patient outcome. Structured feedback and psychiatric consultation appeared adequate to significantly reduce PNES frequency and improve aspects of quality of life, while the addition of a weekly phone contact also led to improved mood.

New-onset refractory status epilepticus: Etiology, clinical features, and outcome.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to determine the etiology, clinical features, and predictors of outcome of new-onset refractory status epilepticus. METHODS: Retrospective review of patients with refractory status epilepticus without etiology identified within 48 hours of admission between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2013, in 13 academic medical centers. The primary outcome measure was poor functional outcome at discharge (defined as a score >3 on the modified Rankin Scale). RESULTS: Of 130 cases, 67 (52%) remained cryptogenic. The most common identified etiologies were autoimmune (19%) and paraneoplastic (18%) encephalitis. Full data were available in 125 cases (62 cryptogenic). Poor outcome occurred in 77 of 125 cases (62%), and 28 (22%) died. Predictors of poor outcome included duration of status epilepticus, use of anesthetics, and medical complications. Among the 63 patients with available follow-up data (median 9 months), functional status improved in 36 (57%); 79% had good or fair outcome at last follow-up, but epilepsy developed in 37% with most survivors (92%) remaining on antiseizure medications. Immune therapies were used less frequently in cryptogenic cases, despite a comparable prevalence of inflammatory CSF changes. CONCLUSIONS: Autoimmune encephalitis is the most commonly identified cause of new-onset refractory status epilepticus, but half remain cryptogenic. Outcome at discharge is poor but improves during follow-up. Epilepsy develops in most cases. The role of anesthetics and immune therapies warrants further investigation.

Consensus statement on continuous EEG in critically ill adults and children, part II: personnel, technical specifications, and clinical practice.

INTRODUCTION: Critical Care Continuous EEG (CCEEG) is a common procedure to monitor brain function in patients with altered mental status in intensive care units. There is significant variability in patient populations undergoing CCEEG and in technical specifications for CCEEG performance. METHODS: The Critical Care Continuous EEG Task Force of the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society developed expert consensus recommendations on the use of CCEEG in critically ill adults and children. RECOMMENDATIONS: The consensus panel describes the qualifications and responsibilities of CCEEG personnel including neurodiagnostic technologists and interpreting physicians. The panel outlines required equipment for CCEEG, including electrodes, EEG machine and amplifier specifications, equipment for polygraphic data acquisition, EEG and video review machines, central monitoring equipment, and network, remote access, and data storage equipment. The consensus panel also describes how CCEEG should be acquired, reviewed and interpreted. The panel suggests methods for patient selection and triage; initiation of CCEEG; daily maintenance of CCEEG; electrode removal and infection control; quantitative EEG techniques; EEG and behavioral monitoring by non-physician personnel; review, interpretation, and reports; and data storage protocols. CONCLUSION: Recommended qualifications for CCEEG personnel and CCEEG technical specifications will facilitate standardization of this emerging technology.

Consensus statement on continuous EEG in critically ill adults and children, part I: indications.

INTRODUCTION: Critical Care Continuous EEG (CCEEG) is a common procedure to monitor brain function in patients with altered mental status in intensive care units. There is significant variability in patient populations undergoing CCEEG and in technical specifications for CCEEG performance. METHODS: The Critical Care Continuous EEG Task Force of the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society developed expert consensus recommendations on the use of CCEEG in critically ill adults and children. RECOMMENDATIONS: The consensus panel recommends CCEEG for diagnosis of nonconvulsive seizures, nonconvulsive status epilepticus, and other paroxysmal events, and for assessment of the efficacy of therapy for seizures and status epilepticus. The consensus panel suggests CCEEG for identification of ischemia in patients at high risk for cerebral ischemia; for assessment of level of consciousness in patients receiving intravenous sedation or pharmacologically induced coma; and for prognostication in patients after cardiac arrest. For each indication, the consensus panel describes the patient populations for which CCEEG is indicated, evidence supporting use of CCEEG, utility of video and quantitative EEG trends, suggested timing and duration of CCEEG, and suggested frequency of review and interpretation. CONCLUSION: CCEEG has an important role in detection of secondary injuries such as seizures and ischemia in critically ill adults and children with altered mental status.

Long-term video EEG monitoring for diagnosis of psychogenic nonepileptic seizures.

Psychogenic nonepileptic seizures have long been known by many names. A short list includes hysteroepilepsy, hysterical seizures, pseudoseizures, nonepileptic events, nonepileptic spells, nonepileptic seizures, and psychogenic nonepileptic attacks. These events are typically misdiagnosed for years and are frequently treated as electrographic seizures and epilepsy. These patients experience all the side effects of antiepileptic drugs and none of the benefits. Video electroencephalogram (EEG) monitoring is the gold standard diagnostic test that can make a clear distinction between psychogenic nonepileptic seizures and epilepsy. Video EEG allows us to correctly characterize the patient's events and therefore properly diagnose and direct management. As a result, years of faulty management and wasted health care dollars can be avoided.

Interrater agreement for Critical Care EEG Terminology.

OBJECTIVE: The interpretation of critical care electroencephalography (EEG) studies is challenging because of the presence of many periodic and rhythmic patterns of uncertain clinical significance. Defining the clinical significance of these patterns requires standardized terminology with high interrater agreement (IRA). We sought to evaluate IRA for the final, published American Clinical Neurophysiology Society (ACNS)-approved version of the critical care EEG terminology (2012 version). Our evaluation included terms not assessed previously and incorporated raters with a broad range of EEG reading experience. METHODS: After reviewing a set of training slides, 49 readers independently completed a Web-based test consisting of 11 identical questions for each of 37 EEG samples (407 questions). Questions assessed whether a pattern was an electrographic seizure; pattern location (main term 1), pattern type (main term 2); and presence and classification of eight other key features ("plus" modifiers, sharpness, absolute and relative amplitude, frequency, number of phases, fluctuation/evolution, and the presence of "triphasic" morphology). RESULTS: IRA statistics (κ values) were almost perfect (90-100%) for seizures, main terms 1 and 2, the +S modifier (superimposed spikes/sharp waves or sharply contoured rhythmic delta activity), sharpness, absolute amplitude, frequency, and number of phases. Agreement was substantial for the +F (superimposed fast activity) and +R (superimposed rhythmic delta activity) modifiers (66% and 67%, respectively), moderate for triphasic morphology (58%), and fair for evolution (21%). SIGNIFICANCE: IRA for most terms in the ACNS critical care EEG terminology is high. These terms are suitable for multicenter research on the clinical significance of critical care EEG patterns. A PowerPoint slide summarizing this article is available for download in the Supporting Information section http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/epi.12653/supinfo.

Intravenous ketamine for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus: a retrospective multicenter study.

PURPOSE: To examine patterns of use, efficacy, and safety of intravenous ketamine for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus (RSE). METHODS: Multicenter retrospective review of medical records and electroencephalography (EEG) reports in 10 academic medical centers in North America and Europe, including 58 subjects, representing 60 episodes of RSE that were identified between 1999 and 2012. Seven episodes occurred after anoxic brain injury. KEY FINDINGS: Permanent control of RSE was achieved in 57% (34 of 60) of episodes. Ketamine was felt to have contributed to permanent control ("possible" or "likely" responses) in 32% (19 of 60) including seven (12%) in which ketamine was the last drug added (likely responses). Four of the seven likely responses, but none of the 12 possible ones, occurred in patients with postanoxic brain injury. No likely responses were observed when infusion rates were lower than 0.9 mg/kg/h, when ketamine was introduced at least 8 days after SE onset, or after failure of seven or more drugs. Ketamine was discontinued due to possible adverse events in five patients. Complications were mostly attributed to concurrent drugs, especially other anesthetics. Mortality rate was 43% (26 of 60), but was lower when SE was controlled within 24 h of ketamine initiation (16% vs. 56%, p = 0.0047). SIGNIFICANCE: Ketamine appears to be a relatively effective and safe drug for the treatment of RSE. This retrospective series provides preliminary data on effective dose and appropriate time of intervention to aid in the design of a prospective trial to further define the role of ketamine in the treatment of RSE.

Treatment of status epilepticus: an international survey of experts.

BACKGROUND: As part of the development of the Neurocritical Care Society (NCS) Status Epilepticus (SE) Guidelines, the NCS SE Writing Committee conducted an international survey of SE experts. METHODS: The survey consisted of three patient vignettes (case 1, an adult; case 2, an adolescent; case 3, a child) and questions regarding treatment. The questions for each case focused on initial and sequential therapy as well as when to use continuous intravenous (cIV) therapy and for what duration. Responses were obtained from 60/120 (50%) of those surveyed. RESULTS: This survey reveals that there is expert consensus for using intravenous lorazepam for the emergent (first-line) therapy of SE in children and adults. For urgent (second-line) therapy, the most common agents chosen were phenytoin/fosphenytoin, valproate sodium, and levetiracetam; these choices varied by the patient age in the case scenarios. Physicians who care for adult patients chose cIV therapy for RSE, especially midazolam and propofol, rather than a standard AED sooner than those who care for children; and in children, there is a reluctance to choose propofol. Pentobarbital was chosen later in the therapy for all ages. CONCLUSION: There is close agreement between the recently published NCS guideline for SE and this survey of experts in the treatment of SE.

Interrater reliability of ICU EEG research terminology.

BACKGROUND: Standardized research terminology critical to the establishment of a multicenter intensive care unit (ICU) electroencephalogram (EEG) database was originally proposed in 2005 and has been modified many times since. However, interrater agreement (IRA) of the revised terminology has not been investigated. METHODS: After a brief tutorial, investigators of ICU EEG research centers (n = 16) took an 82-question EEG certification test comprising 10-second EEG samples, which assessed the use of main term 1 (pattern location), main term 2 (pattern type), and modifiers from the most recently revised terminology. RESULTS: Kappa values for main terms 1 and 2 were 0.87 and 0.92, respectively. Agreement was 93% for determination of amplitude and 80% for determination of frequency. Kappa values for each of the "plus" modifiers (fast, rhythmic, and sharp/spike activity) were 0.54, 0.62, and 0.16 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Main terms 1 and 2 have high IRA and are reasonable for use in multicenter research. There is a suggestion that assessment of amplitude has good reliability, while assessment of frequency may have less reliability. The fast and rhythmic "plus" modifiers have moderate IRA, while sharp/spike modifier has only slight IRA implying that further refinement and assessment of terminology modifiers may be necessary.

Guidelines for the evaluation and management of status epilepticus.

Status epilepticus (SE) treatment strategies vary substantially from one institution to another due to the lack of data to support one treatment over another. To provide guidance for the acute treatment of SE in critically ill patients, the Neurocritical Care Society organized a writing committee to evaluate the literature and develop an evidence-based and expert consensus practice guideline. Literature searches were conducted using PubMed and studies meeting the criteria established by the writing committee were evaluated. Recommendations were developed based on the literature using standardized assessment methods from the American Heart Association and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation systems, as well as expert opinion when sufficient data were lacking.