Improved ictal assessment performance in the epilepsy monitoring unit via standardization.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the standardization and implementation of an ictal testing protocol in the Epilepsy Monitoring Unit (EMU) leads to improvements in ictal testing performance. METHODS: Ictal assessments completed in the EMU from a single center were retrospectively reviewed over a two-month period. Each assessment was evaluated to determine whether 8 high-yield aspects of the ictal assessment were performed. Following observation of performance, a standardized ictal testing protocol was developed based on a root cause analysis and review of consensus guidelines. This protocol was disseminated to staff in conjunction with an annual epilepsy education seminar. Ictal assessment performance was re-assessed during the subsequent two months (short-term follow-up) and again during a five- to seven-month period (long-term follow-up) beyond the initial intervention. For sub-group analysis, event characteristics (event type, time of assessment) and patient characteristics (age, gender) were also evaluated and analyzed in relation to ictal testing performance. RESULTS: All eight individual ictal testing elements were more likely to be assessed in short-term and long-term follow-up periods when compared to pre-intervention assessments. The cumulative difference in ictal testing was 20.4% (95% CI 3.7-37.2, p = 0.02) greater for the short-term period and 16.7% (95% CI -0.3% to 33.8%, p = 0.05) greater in the long-term period when compared to baseline testing. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of a standardized ictal testing battery in conjunction with staff education leads to an objective improvement in ictal assessment performance. Further research is warranted to assess the replicability of our findings.

Futures Planning at the AAN: Approach and Initial Outcome.

We describe a process of organizational strategic future forecasting, with a horizon of 2035, as implemented by the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) on behalf of its members, and as a model approach for other organizations. The participants were members of the 2018-2020 AAN Boards of Directors and Executive Team, moderated by a consultant with expertise in future forecasting. Four predetermined model scenarios of import to our field (1 "expectable," 1 "challenging," and 2 "visionary") were discussed in small groups, with alternative scenarios developed in specific domains. Common themes emerged among all scenarios: the importance of thoughtful integration of biomedical and information technology tools into neurologic practice; continued demonstration of the value of neurologic care to society; and emphasis on population management and prevention of neurologic disease. Allowing for the inherent uncertainties of predicting the future, the AAN's integration of structured forecasting into its strategic planning process has allowed the organization to prepare more effectively for change, such as the disruptions stemming from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The approaches outlined here will be integrated into future AAN operations and may be implemented to a similar effect by other organizations.

Leadership, recognition awards, and publication by men and women in the American Academy of Neurology.

OBJECTIVE: To study sex differences with respect to publications, leadership, and recognition awards in the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) in light of recent research highlighting inequities in these domains. METHODS: We examined medical school graduation, neurology residency (using American Medical Association and American Council for Graduate Medical Education data), membership in the AAN, first and last authorship in Neurology®, membership on AAN committees, and AAN recognition awards by sex for 1997, 2007, and 2017. RESULTS: Female medical students were less likely to enter neurology residency in 1997 only. In 2007 and 2017, there was no proportionate difference between men and women as last author, a surrogate for senior member of the author panel. In 2017, women were proportionately more likely to be first authors than men, a surrogate for principal investigator of the study. Committee membership was less for women in 1997 and 2007 (p < 0.001) but was not proportionately different in 2017 (p = 0.534). Women were proportionately more likely to receive recognition awards in all years studied (1997 p = 0.008, 2007 p < 0.001, 2017 p < 0.001), although absolute numbers of women were lower. CONCLUSIONS: Female membership, leadership (through committee membership), and publications as last author were lower in 1997 in the AAN. These same metrics demonstrated substantial proportionate changes, with no differences in last authorship in 2007 and 2017, greater likelihood for women to be first author in 2017, no differences in committee membership in 2017, and greater likelihood of receiving awards determined by merit in all 3 years.

Checklist for the preparation and review of pain clinical trial publications: a pain-specific supplement to CONSORT.

INTRODUCTION: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are considered the gold standard when assessing the efficacy of interventions because randomization of treatment assignment minimizes bias in treatment effect estimates. However, if RCTs are not performed with methodological rigor, many opportunities for bias in treatment effect estimates remain. Clear and transparent reporting of RCTs is essential to allow the reader to consider the opportunities for bias when critically evaluating the results. To promote such transparent reporting, the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) group has published a series of recommendations starting in 1996. However, a decade after the publication of the first CONSORT guidelines, systematic reviews of clinical trials in the pain field identified a number of common deficiencies in reporting (e.g., failure to identify primary outcome measures and analyses, indicate clearly the numbers of participants who completed the trial and were included in the analyses, or report harms adequately). METHODS: Qualitative review of a diverse set of published recommendations and systematic reviews that addressed the reporting of clinical trials, including those related to all therapeutic indications (e.g., CONSORT) and those specific to pain clinical trials. RESULTS: A checklist designed to supplement the content covered in the CONSORT checklist with added details relating to challenges specific to pain trials or found to be poorly reported in recent pain trials was developed. CONCLUSIONS: Authors and reviewers of analgesic RCTs should consult the CONSORT guidelines and this checklist to ensure that the issues most pertinent to pain RCTs are reported with transparency.

Risk of cardiac events in Long QT syndrome patients when taking antiseizure medications.

Many antiseizure medications (ASMs) affect ion channel function. We investigated whether ASMs alter the risk of cardiac events in patients with corrected QT (QTc) prolongation. The study included people from the Rochester-based Long QT syndrome (LQTS) Registry with baseline QTc prolongation and history of ASM therapy (n = 296). Using multivariate Anderson-Gill models, we assessed the risk of recurrent cardiac events associated with ASM therapy. We stratified by LQTS genotype and predominant mechanism of ASM action (Na+ channel blocker and gamma-aminobutyric acid modifier.) There was an increased risk of cardiac events when participants with QTc prolongation were taking vs off ASMs (HR 1.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.36-2.00, P < 0.001). There was an increased risk of cardiac events when LQTS2 (HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.03-2.15, P = 0.036) but not LQTS1 participants were taking ASMs (interaction, P = 0.016). Na+ channel blocker ASMs were associated with an increased risk of cardiac events in participants with QTc prolongation, specifically LQTS2, but decreased risk in LQTS1. The increased risk when taking all ASMs and Na+ channel blocker ASMs was attenuated by concurrent beta-adrenergic blocker therapy (interaction, P < 0.001). Gamma-aminobutyric acid modifier ASMs were associated with an increased risk of events in patients not concurrently treated with beta-adrenergic blockers. Female participants were at an increased risk of cardiac events while taking all ASMs and each class of ASMs. Despite no change in overall QTc duration, pharmacogenomic analyses set the stage for future prospective clinical and mechanistic studies to validate that ASMs with predominantly Na+ channel blocking actions are deleterious in LQTS2, but protective in LQTS1.