Healthcare utilization and cost outcomes for a multicenter first seizure and new onset epilepsy clinic.

RATIONALE: A First Seizure/New Onset Epilepsy (FS/NOE) protocol was implemented to ensure proper evaluation by an epileptologist and improve overall care for patients. We compared healthcare utilization and cost incurred by patients pre and post protocol implementation. METHODS: Clinical data were retrospectively collected from the EMR and cost data from the financial database. Patients were identified by FS event and grouped into either the pre-implementation (pre-FSC) or post-implementation cohort (post-FSC). Pre-FSC patients were seen between January 2014-December 2015 and post-FSC between March 2016-January 2018. Utilization outcomes include time from FS to neurology appointment, MRI, and electroencephalogram (EEG). Cost outcomes included the annualized median difference in pre versus post costs for ER, inpatient, outpatient or ambulatory, and total hospital services. Cost and utilization outcomes were collected within 90 days or 6 months post first-seizure event. Pre and post cohorts were compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazard models for time-to-event outcomes, multivariable median regression models for cost differences and negative binomial regression models for utilization analyses. Models were adjusted for age, sex, health insurance, and comorbidities. RESULTS: One-hundred and fifty six patients were included with 84 (53.8%) pre- and 72 (46.2%) post-FSC patients. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression results indicated post-FSC patients had significantly faster time-to-first neurology appointment (5.0 vs. 20.9 days, p < .001; Adjusted Hazard Ratio (HR) = 5.98, p < .001), time-to-MRI (9.0 vs. 27.0 days; p = 0.005; HR = 1.88, p = .021) and EEG (3.6 vs. 48.6 days, p < .001; HR = 9.01, p < .001). A total of 138 patients had at least one cost in the financial database. For 6-month follow-up period, post-FSC patients had higher adjusted all-cause total median costs (+$830, p = 0.009) and outpatient costs (+$1203, p < .001) but lower ED costs (-245, p = 0.073), not significant. Results were similar for seizure-related costs. Similarly, Post-FSC patients had a significantly higher likelihood of all-cause (Adjusted Rate Ratio (ARR) = 1.41, p = .029) and outpatient utilization (ARR = 1.72, p = .008) but lower ED utilization (ARR = 0.54, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the FSC decreased time to evaluation by a neurologist and time to diagnostic workup. Ultimately, total healthcare costs and ambulatory costs increased but ED costs and utilization were reduced. It is our hypothesis that faster access to initial care and diagnosis would result in better control of seizures and reduce long-term costs and utilization. Further research over a longer duration of time across a broader population is needed to evaluate the full implications of an epilepsy specialist-populated FSC.

The effects of lacosamide on cognition, quality-of-life measures, and quality of life in patients with refractory partial epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine cognitive and quality-of-life measures/quality of life outcomes with adjunctive lacosamide therapy in patients with treatment-resistant partial epilepsy. METHODS: This was a prospective, open-label, nonblinded, adjunctive therapy test-retest (within subjects) study of patients with treatment-resistant partial epilepsy in which outcome (cognitive functioning and mood/quality of life) was measured in the same subject before and after adjunctive lacosamide administration for 24weeks. The cognitive assessment included the following: Controlled Oral Word Association Test, Buschke Selective Reminding Test, Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised, Stroop Color Word Test, Symbol Digit Modalities Test, Digit Span, Digit Cancellation, and Trails A and B. The quality-of-life measures/quality-of-life assessment included the following: Beck Depression Inventory-II, Profile of Mood States, and Quality of Life Inventory-89. Lacosamide was started at 100mg (50mg twice daily) and could be titrated as needed up to 400mg/day (200mg twice daily). Baseline concomitant AEDs were kept constant. Composite scores were calculated for a pre-post difference score for the cognitive and mood/quality-of-life measures separately and used in regression analyses to correct for the effects of age, education, seizure frequency, seizure severity, dose of lacosamide, and number of AEDs at baseline. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were enrolled (13 males, 21 females). Mean age was 38.8±2.43years. Mean seizure frequency decreased significantly from 2.0±2.55 seizures per week at baseline to 1.02±1.72 seizures per week at posttreatment (t=4.59, p<.0001) with a 50% responder rate seen in 18 patients (52.9%). No significant differences were found on the composite scores of the cognitive or the mood/quality-of-life measures after 6months of lacosamide. SIGNIFICANCE: Lacosamide appeared to have low risks of significant changes in cognition or mood/quality of life. In addition, the present study supports prior studies that have proven lacosamide as an effective adjunctive therapy for the treatment of resistant partial epilepsy.