A journey into the unknown: An ethnographic examination of drug-resistant epilepsy treatment and management in the United States.

Patients often recognize unmet needs that can improve patient-provider experiences in disease treatment management. These needs are rarely captured and may be hard to quantify in difficult-to-treat disease states such as drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). To further understand challenges living with and managing DRE, a team of medical anthropologists conducted ethnographic field assessments with patients to qualitatively understand their experience with DRE across the United States. In addition, healthcare provider assessments were conducted in community clinics and Comprehensive Epilepsy Centers to further uncover patient-provider treatment gaps. We identified four distinct stages of the treatment and management journey defined by patients' perceived control over their epilepsy: Gripped in the Panic Zone, Diligently Tracking to Plan, Riding a Rollercoaster in the Dark, and Reframing Priorities to Redefine Treatment Success. We found that patients sought resources to streamline communication with their care team, enhanced education on treatment options beyond medications, and long-term resources to protect against a decline in control over managing their epilepsy once drug-resistant. Likewise, treatment management optimization strategies are provided to improve current DRE standard of care with respect to identified patient-provider gaps. These include the use of digital disease management tools, standardizing neuropsychiatrists into patients' initial care team, and introducing surgical and non-pharmacological treatment options upon epilepsy and DRE diagnoses, respectively. This ethnographic study uncovers numerous patient-provider gaps, thereby presenting a conceptual framework to advance DRE treatment. Further Incentivization from professional societies and healthcare systems to support standardization of the treatment optimization strategies provided herein into clinical practice is needed.

The refractory epilepsy screening tool for Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (REST-LGS).

BACKGROUND: The complex clinical presentation and progression of Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS) can complicate the accurate diagnosis of this severe, lifelong, childhood-onset epilepsy, often resulting in suboptimal treatment. The Refractory Epilepsy Screening Tool for LGS (REST-LGS) was developed to improve the identification of patients with LGS. METHODS: Using the Modified Delphi Consensus, a group of experts developed and tested the REST-LGS Case Report Form (CRF) comprising 8 criteria (4 major, 4 minor) considered potentially indicative of LGS. Diagnosis-blinded specialist and nonspecialist raters at 2 epilepsy centers applied the CRF to deidentified patient records, including 1:1 records of patients with drug-resistant epilepsy or confirmed LGS. Interrater reliability was measured by Cohen's κ. Diagnosis was then unblinded to reveal common criteria for LGS or drug-resistant epilepsy. Cronbach's α was used to measure internal consistency between raters for all criteria combined. RESULTS: Of 200 patients, 81% to 85% met 1 to 3 major criteria. At both sites, moderate (κ, 0.41-0.60) to good (κ, 0.61-0.80) agreement on most criteria was reached between expert and nonexpert raters. Unblinding revealed that most patients with LGS met 3 major and 2 to 3 minor criteria, while patients with drug-resistant epilepsy met ≤1 major and only 1 to 2 minor criteria. Cronbach's α of raters at both sites was 0.64. CONCLUSIONS: The combined number of major/minor criteria on the CRF may be particularly indicative of LGS. Therefore, the REST-LGS may be a valuable clinical tool in identifying patients requiring further diagnostic evaluation for LGS.

Olfactory dysfunction and training in children with COVID-19 infection: A prospective study Post-COVID pediatric olfactory training.

OBJECTIVE: Postviral olfactory dysfunction (OD) including corona 2019 viral disease (COVID-19) OD occurs in both adults and children. Despite limited reports of efficacy in treating adult postviral including COVID-19 OD with olfactory training (OT), its effects on children in general, and post-COVID-19 in specific, is unknown. The study aimed at evaluating the effects of OT in a COVID-19 OD pediatric cohort. METHODS: A single-arm prospective study of pediatric COVID-19 OD subjects confirmed by the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT), was conducted. All subjects underwent OT by sniffing 4 odorants (lavender, orange, peppermint, and eucalyptus) for 1 min twice a day for 3 months. Subjects underwent an odorant identification test (OIT) of the 4 odorants each visit. A repeat UPSIT was administered at the 4th visit. RESULTS: The study enrolled a total of 37 subjects [11 males/26 females with mean age/standard deviation (std) of 15.6(2.1) years]. The time interval between COVID-19 and entry was 5.3(2.4) months. The mean pre/post study UPSIT score improvement was 2.3(4.7), p = .09. OIT scores between entry and 3 subsequent visits showed a mean improvement of 1.8(1.5), 1.8(1.9) and 2.3(1.9) odorants, respectively, with P < .001 for all 3 comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: OT subjects were predominantly female teens with substantial OD lasting greater than 5 months. OT did not affect OD as measured by UPSIT but OIT scores improved during OT. We postulate that OT likely has a role in pediatric post-COVID OD recovery, but UPSIT likely is too rigid to detect disparate odorant improvement.

Real-world use of the updated refractory epilepsy screening tool for Lennox-Gastaut syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the Refractory Epilepsy Screening Tool for Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome (REST-LGS) for real-world identification of LGS in adults and to develop a scoring system for the tool. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of adults with drug resistant epilepsy (DRE) and intellectual development disorder (IDD) was conducted by 2 primary care providers blinded to diagnosis. The REST-LGS was designed via the Modified Delphi Consensus and was previously validated. This tool consists of 8 criteria (4 major, 4 minor) considered indicative of LGS. To account for missing data in the earlier validation study and to evaluate applicability in a real-world setting, the REST-LGS was refined to include a scoring system in which major criteria were more heavily weighted than minor criteria, producing categories of "likely" (>11 points), "possible" (8-11 points), and "unlikely" (<8 points) LGS. Statistical analyses were descriptive. RESULTS: Of the 100 patients included in the analysis, data for slow spike-waves in electroencephalography and seizure onset age - both major REST-LGS criteria - were missing for 46% and 42% of patients, respectively. The majority of patients met 4 of the 8 REST-LGS criteria (cognitive impairment since childhood, 71%; persistent seizures despite a trial of ≥2 antiseizure medications, 65%; seizure onset before the age of 12 years, 57%; ≥2 seizure types, 56%). All 4 major criteria were met in 22 patients (22%). The percentages of patients considered "likely," "possible," or "unlikely" to have LGS were 26%, 30%, and 44%, respectively. Of the 74 patients without a previous LGS diagnosis, 42 (57%) were identified as "possible" or "likely" to have LGS using REST-LGS. SIGNIFICANCE: In this analysis, the validated REST-LGS was evaluated in a real-world setting. The majority of previously undiagnosed patients were identified via REST-LGS as "possible" or "likely" to have LGS. Extensive missing data highlights challenges of LGS diagnosis in adults. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: There is a need to identify adult patients with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS) so they can receive appropriate treatment. The Refractory Epilepsy Screening Tool for LGS (REST-LGS) questionnaire was designed by experts to identify whether patients with seizures that are not controlled by medications may have LGS. In this study, 2 physicians completed the REST-LGS using charts for 100 patients who experience seizures not controlled by medications. Of the patients who were previously diagnosed as not having LGS, the majority were "likely" or "possible" to have LGS based on the REST-LGS; therefore, the REST-LGS can identify patients for further evaluation.

Retrospective study and outcome of 307 cats with feline infectious peritonitis treated with legally sourced veterinary compounded preparations of remdesivir and GS-441524 (2020-2022).

OBJECTIVES: Feline infectious peritonitis (FIP) is a serious disease that arises due to feline coronavirus infection. The nucleoside analogues remdesivir and GS-441524 can be effective in its treatment, but most studies have used unregulated products of unknown composition. The aim of the present study was to describe the treatment of FIP using legally sourced veterinary-prescribed regulated veterinary compounded products containing known amounts of remdesivir (injectable) or GS-441524 (oral tablets). METHODS: Cats were recruited via email advice services, product sales contacts and study publicity. Cats were excluded if they were deemed unlikely to have FIP, were not treated exclusively with the veterinary compounded products, or if there was a lack of cat and/or treatment (including response) data. Extensive cat and treatment data were collected. RESULTS: Among the 307 cats recruited, the predominant type of FIP was most commonly abdominal effusive (49.5%) and then neurological (14.3%). Three treatment protocols were used; remdesivir alone (33.9%), remdesivir followed by GS-441524 (55.7%) and GS-441524 alone (10.4%). The median (range) initial treatment period duration and longest follow-up time point after starting treatment were 84 (1-330) days and 248 (1-814) days, respectively. The most common side effect was injection pain (in 47.8% of those given subcutaneous remdesivir). Of the 307 cats, 33 (10.8%) relapsed, 15 (45.5%) during and 18 (54.5%) after the initial treatment period. At the longest follow-up time point after completion of the initial treatment period, 84.4% of cats were alive. The cats achieving a complete response within 30 days of starting treatment were significantly more likely to be alive at the end of the initial treatment period than those cats that did not. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Legally sourced remdesivir and GS-441524 products, either alone or used sequentially, were very effective in the treatment of FIP in this group of cats. Variable protocols precluded statistical comparison of treatment regimens.

A multidisciplinary care model to increase access to neurologic ambulatory care.

BACKGROUND: Expert patient care has been associated with improved outcomes for neurology patients, yet timely access to specialists is challenging. The employment of nurse practitioners (NPs) holds great potential to increase access to neurologic ambulatory care, however little practical guidance exists to date for how this may be achieved. LOCAL PROBLEM: To improve timely care provision for patients with neurologic disease, we employed a multidisciplinary care utilization framework that used NPs to expand clinic appointment availability. METHODS AND INTERVENTION: After evaluating our baseline performance, we applied a standardized approach to the deployment of NPs in neurology clinic with regard to scheduling clinic sessions and patient appointments. The primary outcome measure was appointment availability measured over 6 months preintervention (June to November 2016) and 6 months postintervention (June to November 2017). Secondary measures included NP effort allocation. RESULTS: The postintervention period demonstrated an increase in available appointments (3,731 preintervention vs. 4,318 postintervention) and scheduled appointments (2,014 vs. 2,685). Nurse practitioners spent more time practicing at the fullest extent of their licensure. All improvements were accomplished without the hiring of additional staff. CONCLUSIONS: A multidisciplinary care utilization framework for NP employment across neurology subspecialties resulted in an increase in appointment availability. Furthermore, this model is likely to be sustainable due to provider satisfaction and financial viability.

Improved availability and quality of care with epilepsy nurse practitioners.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the quality of care delivered by nurse practitioner (NP)-physician teams employed to expand clinic appointment availability for patients with epilepsy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational cohort study of patients with epilepsy presenting to the Penn Epilepsy Center for a new patient appointment in 2014. During this time, patients were seen either by an NP-physician team care model or a more traditional physician-only care model. These care models were compared with regard to adherence to the 2014 American Academy of Neurology epilepsy quality measures at the initial visit. Clinical outcomes of seizure frequency, presentations to the Emergency Department, injury, and death were assessed over the subsequent year. RESULTS: A total of 169 patients were identified by our inclusion and exclusion criteria: 65 patients in the NP-physician team care model cohort and 104 patients in the physician-only care model cohort. The NP-physician team care model saw, on average, 3 more patients per clinic session. There were no meaningful differences between these cohorts in baseline characteristics. The NP-physician team care model showed equivalent adherence to the physician-only care model for the epilepsy quality measures, with superior adherence to the counseling measures of querying for side effects, provision of personalized epilepsy safety education, and screening for behavioral health disorders. The 2 care models performed similarly in all clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: An NP-physician team care model employed to increase availability of care could also improve quality of care delivered.