Current practices in epilepsy monitoring units (EMU) in India.

AIM: As an initial step to develop guidelines for epilepsy monitoring units (EMUs) appropriate for developing countries, we inquired the existing practices in EMUs in India. METHODS: After checking for the content and face validity as well for clarity, we sent a 52-item online non-anonymized questionnaire to all the 52 EMUs in India. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 51 of the 52 EMUs (98% response rate). The majority of the EMUs are located in major cities and 51% are located in non-governmental corporate hospitals. There are total of 122 prolonged video-EEG monitoring (PVEM) beds in India and 70% EMUs have ≤2 beds. Approximately two-thirds of the EMUs have defined protocols for pre-procedure consent and risk assessment, management of seizure clusters and status epilepticus, continuous observation of patients, and peri­ictal testing. Only one-third of the EMUs have protocols for management of post-ictal psychosis, anti-suffocation pillows, and protected environment within bathrooms. The waiting period for PVEM is more (49.9 ± 101 vs. 4.9 ± 10.9 days; p = 0.04) and mean cost for 3-day PVEM is less (INR 8311 ± 9021 vs. 30,371 ± 17,563; p <0.0001) in public as compared to private hospitals. There was a negative correlation between cost of PVEM and the waiting period (r=-0.386; p = 0.01). Safety practices are similar in public and private hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Although practices in EMUs in India vary widely, they are comparable to those in developed countries. India has severe shortage of EMUs and long waiting lists for affordable PVEM.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on epilepsy practice in India: A tripartite survey.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of ongoing COVID-19 pandemic on epilepsy care in India. METHODS: We conducted a three-part survey comprising neurologists, people with epilepsy (PWE), and 11 specialized epilepsy centers across India. We sent two separate online survey questionnaires to Indian neurologists and PWE to assess the epilepsy practice, seizures control, and access to care during the COVID-19 pandemic. We collected and compared the data concerning the number of PWE cared for and epilepsy procedures performed during the 6 months periods preceding and following COVID-19 lockdown from epilepsy centers. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 453 neurologists and 325 PWE. One third of the neurologist reported >50 % decline in outdoor visits by PWE and EEG recordings. The cumulative data from 11 centers showed 65-70 % decline in the number of outdoor patients, video-EEG monitoring, and epilepsy surgery. Working in a hospital admitting COVID-19 patients and use of teleconsultation correlated with this decline. Half of PWE had postponed their planned outpatient visits and EEG. Less than 10 % of PWE missed their antiseizure medicines (ASM) or had seizures due to the nonavailability of ASM. Seizure control remained unchanged or improved in 92 % PWE. Half of the neurologists started using teleconsultation during the pandemic. Only 4% of PWE were afflicted with COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant decline in the number of PWE visiting hospitals, their seizure control and access to ASMs were not affected during the COVID-19 pandemic in India. Risk of COVID-19 infection in PWE is similar to general population.

Improved Patient-Independent System for Detection of Electrical Onset of Seizures.

PURPOSE: To design a non-patient-specific system to detect the electrical onset of seizures in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy. METHODS: We used EEG data from 29 seizures of 18 temporal lobe epilepsy patients who underwent multiday video-scalp EEG monitoring as part of their presurgical evaluations. We segmented each data set into preictal and ictal phases, and identified spectral entropy, spectral energy, and signal energy as useful features for discriminating normal and seizure conditions. The performance of five different classifiers was analyzed using these features to design an automated detection system. RESULTS: Among the five classifiers, decision tree, k-nearest neighbor, and support vector machine performed with sensitivity (specificity) of 79% (81%), 75% (85%), and 80% (86%), respectively. The other two, linear discriminant algorithm and Naive Bayes classifiers, performed with sensitivity (specificity) of 54% (94%), 47% (96%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The support vector machine-based seizure detection system showed better detection capability in terms of sensitivity and specificity measures as compared to linear discriminant algorithm, Naive Bayes, decision tree, and k-nearest neighbor classifiers. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that a generalized system to detect the electrical onset of seizures in temporal lobe epilepsy using scalp-recorded EEG is possible. If confirmed on a larger data set, our findings may have significant implications for the management of seizures, especially in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy.