Opinions and experience of neurologists and neurology trainees in Saudi Arabia on functional neurological disorders: a survey based study.

BACKGROUND: Functional Neurological Disorder (FND) is commonly encountered in clinical practice, causing functional impairment and poor quality of life. As there is limited data from Saudi Arabia, our study aims to explore the experience and opinions of Saudi neurologists and neurology trainees regarding FND. METHODS: In our cross-sectional observational study, we included 100 neurology consultants and trainees. Data was collected using an online questionnaire from March to August 2023. RESULTS: A total of one hundred neurologists participated in the survey. Although 41% of physicians encountered FND patients on a weekly basis or more frequently, only 41.7% of trainees reported receiving dedicated lectures on FND. Furthermore, only 46% of respondents felt comfortable providing a clear explanation of the FND diagnosis to their patients. While the majority (64%) used the term "Functional Neurological Disorder" in medical documentation, only 43% used this term when communicating the diagnosis to patients, with the terminology varying widely. Clinicians emphasized that inconsistent and variable neurological examinations were key indicators raising diagnostic suspicion, which aligns with the recommended reliance on detailed clinical history and neurological examination. Lastly, 61% of physicians stated that their approach to patients with FND lacked a structured management plan. CONCLUSION: Our study findings emphasize that FND is commonly encountered in clinical practice and reveal a significant lack of targeted education on FND for neurology trainees. Enhancing educational programs for both trainees and practicing neurologists on this prevalent neurological condition is essential for improving patient care and outcomes.

Delivering the diagnosis of multiple system atrophy: a multicenter survey on Japanese neurologists' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Multiple system atrophy (MSA) is a progressive, incurable, life-threatening neurodegenerative disease uniquely characterized by the risk of sudden death, which makes diagnosis delivery challenging for neurologists. Empirical studies on breaking a diagnosis of MSA are scarce, with no guidelines currently established. This study aimed to investigate neurologists' current practices and experiences in delivering the diagnosis of MSA. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter online survey and employed a mixed-methods (quantitative and qualitative) study design in which responses to open-ended questions were analyzed qualitatively using critical incident technique. RESULTS: Among the 194 neurologists surveyed, 166 opened the survey (response rate = 85.6%), of whom 144 respondents across various Japanese regions completed the survey. Accordingly, 92.3% and 82.8% of the participating neurologists perceived delivering the diagnosis of MSA and explaining the risk of sudden death as difficult, respectively. Factors independently associated with difficulties in diagnosis delivery included explaining the importance of the family decision making process in life-prolonging treatment, perceived difficulties in delivering information regarding the risk of sudden death, and perceived difficulties in differential diagnosis of MSA. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings showed that the majority of neurologists perceived delivering the diagnosis of MSA and explaining the risk of sudden death as difficult, which could have been associated with the difficulty of breaking the diagnosis of MSA. Difficulty in conveying bad news in MSA are caused by various factors, such as empathic burden on neurologists caused by the progressive and incurable nature of MSA, the need to explain complex and important details, including the importance of the family decision-making process in life-prolonging treatment, difficulty of MSA diagnosis, and communication barriers posed by mental status and cognitive impairment in patients or their family members. Neurologists consider various factors in explaining the risk of sudden death (e.g., patient's personality, mental state, and degree of acceptance and understanding) and adjust their manner of communication, such as limiting their communication on such matters or avoiding the use of the term "sudden death" in the early stages of the disease. Although neurologists endeavor to meet the basic standards of good practice, there is room for the multiple aspects for improvement.

Real-life management of patients with mild cognitive impairment: an Italian survey.

BACKGROUND: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is a syndrome with heterogeneous underlying causes and different rates of disease progression, whose clinical heterogeneity leads to a wide variation in diagnostic and therapeutic approaches in clinical practice. The lack of uniform practical recommendations on diagnostic workup and treatment for MCI patients hinders optimal management of these patients, worsening their prognosis. Standardized guidelines for the investigation and follow-up of MCI are therefore urgently required. AIM: Aim of our study was to assess the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to MCI patients in the setting of Italian Memory Clinics. METHODS: A survey was delivered to a sample of Italian neurologists through two different phases: a first exploratory phase recording general information about the usual clinical management of patients with MCI, and a subsequent operative phase assessing the practical diagnostic and therapeutic decisions taken in a real life setting to manage subjects with MCI. RESULTS: A total of 121 neurologists participated to the first phase of the survey and 203 patients were enrolled in the second phase. Information gathered in the first phase of the survey highlighted a non-uniform use of diagnostic criteria and procedures for MCI, as well as a very heterogeneous therapeutic strategy among Italian neurologists. In the second phase, recorded data on diagnostic and therapeutic approach confirmed the large variability observed in the first phase of the survey. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study reflect a suboptimal management of MCI patients in Italy and highlight the need of standardized diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for this condition.

Racial, ethnic, and rural disparities in distance to physicians among decedents with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias in Washington State.

INTRODUCTION: Distance to physicians may explain some of the disparities in Alzheimer's disease and related dementia (AD/ADRD) outcomes. METHODS: We generated round trip distance between residences of decedents with AD/ADRD and the nearest neurologist and primary care physician in Washington State. RESULTS: The overall mean distance to the nearest neurologist and primary care physician was 17 and 4 miles, respectively. Non-Hispanic American Indian and/or Alaska Native and Hispanic decedents would have had to travel 1.12 and 1.07 times farther, respectively, to reach the nearest neurologist compared to non-Hispanic White people. Decedents in micropolitan, small town, and rural areas would have had to travel 2.12 to 4.01 times farther to reach the nearest neurologist and 1.14 to 3.32 times farther to reach the nearest primary care physician than those in metropolitan areas. DISCUSSION: These results underscore the critical need to identify strategies to improve access to specialists and primary care physicians to improve AD/ADRD outcomes. HIGHLIGHTS: Distance to neurologists and primary care physicians among decedents with AD/ADRD American Indian and/or Alaska Native decedents lived further away from neurologists Hispanic decedents lived further away from neurologists Non-metropolitan decedents lived further away from neurologists and primary care Decrease distance to physicians to improve dementia outcomes.

Immigrant Neurologists in the Physician-Scientist Pipeline: An Intervenable Stenosis.

Immigrant neurologists on a visa make up one-fourth of our neurology resident workforce. In this article, we describe the challenges faced by them in pursuit of a career as physician-scientists. We highlight the key role that immigration status plays in various aspects of research advancement early along the neurology pipeline, pertaining to clinical career decisions and the associated delay in achieving these milestones. We conclude with a call to action to address these key roadblocks, which would have the additional potential benefit of improving inclusion and diversity in clinical and translational science. ANN NEUROL 2021;90:542-545.

The migraine signature study: Methods and baseline results.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize patients who utilize services for migraine in a large integrated health care network, and describe patterns of care and utilization. BACKGROUND: Within health care systems, migraine is a common reason for seeking primary and neurology care, but relatively little is documented about who seeks care and the factors that explain variation in utilization. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using electronic health record (EHR) data from Sutter Health primary care (PC) patients who had at least one office visit to a PC clinic between 2013 and 2017. Migraine status was ascertained from diagnosis codes and medication orders. Control status was assigned to those with no evidence of care for any type of headache. We divided the primary care migraine cohort into two groups: those who received all their care for migraine from PC (denoted PC-M) and those who had ≥1 encounter with a neurologist for migraine (denoted N-M). Migraine cases were also designated as having preexisting migraine if they had an encounter with a migraine diagnosis within (±) 6 months of their first study period PC visit and, otherwise, designated as first migraine consult. Two levels of contrasts included: patients with migraine and controls; and within the group of patients with migraine, PC-M and N-M groups. Comorbid conditions were determined from EHR encounter diagnosis codes. RESULTS: We identified 94,149 patients with migraine (including 21,525 N-M and 72,624 PC-M) and 1,248,763 controls. Comorbidities: Proportions of psychiatric [29.8% (n = 28,054) vs. 11.8% (n = 147,043)], autoimmune [(4.4% (n = 4162) vs. 2.6% (n = 31,981)], pain [13.2% (n = 12,439) vs. 5.8% (n = 72,049)], respiratory [24.6% (n = 23,186) vs. 12.3% (n = 153,692)], neurologic [2.9% (n = 2688) vs. 0.9% (n = 11,321)], and cerebrovascular [1.0% (n = 945) vs. 0.6% (n = 7500)] conditions were higher in the migraine group compared to controls, all p < 0.001. Among patients with migraine, the N-M group was similar to the PC-M group in sex, age, ethnicity, and marital status, but were more likely to have preexisting migraine (49.9% (n = 10,734) vs. 36.2% (n = 26,317), p < 0.001). Proportions of comorbid conditions were higher among the N-M group than the PC-M group {psychiatric [38.5% (n = 8291) vs. 27.2% (n = 19,763)], autoimmune [6.3% (n = 1365) vs. 3.9% (n = 2797)], pain [19.6% (n = 4218) vs. 11.3% (n = 8211)], respiratory [30.3% (n = 6516) vs. 23.0% (n = 16,670)], neurologic [6.0% (n = 1288) vs. 1.9% (n = 1400)], cardiovascular [9.7% (n = 2091) vs. 7.0% (n = 5076)], and cerebrovascular [2.3% (n = 500) vs. 0.6% (n = 445)], all p < 0.001}. Medications: During the study period, 82.6% (n = 77,762) of patients with migraine received ≥1 prescription order for an acute migraine medication [89.4% (n = 19,250) of N-M vs. 80.6% (n = 58,512) of PC]. Opioids were prescribed to 52.9% (n = 49,837) of patients with migraine [63.5% (n = 13,669) for N-M and 49.8% (n = 36,168) for PC-M patients). During the study period, 61.4% (n = 57,810) of patients received ≥1 prescription for a migraine preventive medication [81.4% (n = 17,521) of N-M and 55.5% (n = 40,289) of PC-M patients]. The most commonly prescribed classes of preventive medications were antidepressants. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with migraine in a large health system, those who were also cared for in neurology were more likely to receive both acute and preventive medication migraine orders than those patients who did not see a neurologist, with triptans and antidepressants the most commonly prescribed classes of acute and preventive pharmacotherapies, respectively. Opioids were prescribed to approximately half of the total sample and more common in the N-M group. Adjusting for demographics, patients with migraine had higher rates of nearly every comorbidity we assessed and were more likely to utilize services compared to those without migraine. Overall, patients with migraine also cared for in neurology practices used more of all health care resource types under consideration and had more medical issues, which may be due in some part to a more severe, frequent and disabling disease state compared to those who sought care exclusively from PC practices.

Characterizing the providers of and reimbursement for chronic migraine chemodenervation among the Medicare population.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize reimbursement trends and providers for chronic migraine (CM) chemodenervation treatment within the Medicare population since the introduction of the migraine-specific CPT code in 2013. METHODS: We describe trends in procedure volume and total allowed charge on cross-sectional data obtained from 2013 to 2018 Medicare Part B National Summary files. We also utilized the 2017 Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data to analyze higher volume providers (>10 procedures) of this treatment modality. RESULTS: The total number of CM chemodenervation treatments rose from 37,863 in 2013 to 135,023 in 2018 in a near-linear pattern (r = 0.999) and total allowed charges rose from ~$5,217,712 to $19,166,160 (r = 0.999). The majority of high-volume providers were neurologists (78.4%; 1060 of 1352), but a substantial proportion were advanced practice providers (APPs) (10.2%; 138 of 1352). Of the physicians, neurologists performed a higher mean number of procedures per physician compared to non-neurologists (59.6 [95% CI: 56.6-62.6] vs. 45.4 [95% CI: 41.0-50.0], p < 0.001). When comparing physicians and APPs, APPs were paid significantly less ($146.5 [95% CI: $145.6-$147.5] vs. $119.7 [95% CI: $117.6-$121.8], p < 0.001). As a percent of the number of total beneficiaries in each state, the percent of Medicare patients receiving ≥1 CM chemodenervation treatment from a high-volume provider in 2017 ranged from 0.024% (24 patients of 98,033 beneficiaries) in Wyoming to 0.135% (997 of 736,521) in Arizona, with six states falling outside of this range. CONCLUSION: Chemodenervation is an increasingly popular treatment for CM among neurologists and other providers, but the reason for this increase is unclear. There is substantial geographic variation in its use.

Epilepsy care and COVID-19: A cross-sectional online survey from Lithuania.

BACKGROUND: Changes in epilepsy care during the COVID-19 pandemic required to reassess the patient-specialist interaction in the context of telehealth and future vaccination campaigns. AIMS OF THE STUDY: The aims were to outline changes in neurologists' experience when providing care for patients with epilepsy (PWE) and to investigate how neurologists perceive telehealth and vaccination. METHODS: We conducted an anonymous cross-sectional online survey among members of the Lithuanian Association of Neurology. RESULTS: We received 104 completed forms by adult (74, 71.15%) and pediatric neurologists (30, 28.85%). A decrease in epilepsy consultations was noted by 76 (73.1%) specialists, and up to 26 (25.0%) could not provide diagnostic tests at a usual rate. Most respondents (99, 95.2%) would recommend the COVID-19 vaccine for patients at risk. Telehealth was valued as a useful tool in epilepsy care, especially if combined with timely diagnostic and treatment options (Kruskal-Wallis chi-square = 10.392, p = .034 and F[4,99] = 3.125, p = .018, respectively). According to 85 (81.7%) respondents, video calls could substitute in-person visits in at least half of all consultations. CONCLUSIONS: Despite disrupted epilepsy care, neurologists may benefit from telehealth when providing services for PWE and become vaccination advocates to mitigate the spread of preventable infections.

Diagnosis and treatment of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy in clinical practice: A survey among Dutch neurologists.

The diagnosis and treatment of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) is often a challenge. The clinical presentation is diverse, accurate biomarkers are lacking, and the best strategy to initiate and maintain treatment is unclear. The aim of this study was to determine how neurologists diagnose and treat CIDP. We conducted a cross-sectional survey on diagnostic and treatment practices among Dutch neurologists involved in the clinical care of CIDP patients. Forty-four neurologists completed the survey (44/71; 62%). The respondents indicated to use the European Federation of Neurological Societies/Peripheral Nerve Society (EFNS/PNS) 2010 CIDP guideline for the diagnosis in 77% and for treatment in 50%. Only 57% of respondents indicated that the presence of demyelinating electrophysiological findings was mandatory to confirm the diagnosis of CIDP. Most neurologists used intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIg) as first choice treatment, but the indications to start, optimize, or withdraw IVIg, and the use of other immune-modulatory therapies varied. University-affiliated respondents used the EFNS/PNS 2010 diagnostic criteria, nerve imaging tools, and immunosuppressive drugs more often. Despite the existence of an international guideline, there is considerable variation among neurologists in the strategies employed to diagnose and treat CIDP. More specific recommendations regarding: (a) the minimal set of electrophysiological requirements to diagnose CIDP, (b) the possible added value of nerve imaging, especially in patients not meeting the electrodiagnostic criteria, (c) the most relevant serological examinations, and (d) the clear treatment advice, in the new EFNS/PNS guideline, would likely support its implementation in clinical practice.

Self-perceptions on cognitive versus motor disability among neurologists.

OBJECTIVE: The modified Rankin Scale is a functional outcome measure that disproportionately represents motor deficits. We hypothesize that among physicians who most commonly use the modified Rankin Scale to counsel patients on neurological treatment options, personal perception of acceptable or optimal outcome may be discordant with those described in clinical trials. METHODS: A three-question anonymous voluntary survey was emailed to academic and community practicing neurologists and board-eligible or board-certified neurology fellows inquiring about their personal perception of a better quality of life between two choices featuring clinical scenarios that would qualify as modified Rankin Scale 2 and 4 disability outcome scores. RESULTS: Sixty-nine percent of participants were 30-45 years old, 24% were 45-60 years old, and 7% were over 60 years old. Most responders were general neurologists (31.3%). The remaining responders represented multiple subspecialties including neurocritical care, vascular neurology, neurohospitalist medicine, neuromuscular neurology, neurophysiology, child neurology, neuro-oncology, headache, neuroimmunology, movement disorders, and palliative care medicine. Forty-four of 45 neurologists (97.7%) stated they would choose needing a wheelchair if still able to function at their cognitive baseline at work (p < 0.000001). One responder preferred to get around without assistance, despite new cognitive symptoms that would preclude them from working as a physician. CONCLUSIONS: The modified Rankin Scale may not adequately represent preferred outcomes among neurology specialists, particularly with respect to cognitive symptoms. Future studies are needed to characterize long-term cognitive outcomes in patients with acute stroke-related conditions.

Awareness of rare and genetic neurological diseases among italian neurologist. A national survey.

Rare neurological diseases (RNDs) are a heterogeneous group of disorders mainly affecting the central and peripheral nervous systems, representing almost 50% of all rare diseases; this explains why neurologists are very often involved in their diagnosis, treatment and research. The purpose of this study was to quantitatively describe the awareness of RNDs among the neurological community of the Italian Society of Neurology (SIN). A survey of the Italian Neurogenetics and Rare diseases group of the SIN, similar to what was submitted to the members of the EAN Task Force on Rare Neurologic Diseases and to EAN Panels Scientific Committee Management Groups, was launched in January 2019 in order to verify the specific Italian situations and possibly the regional differences. Answers were collected online. We observed that Italian Members of the SIN Neurogenetics and Rare Neurologic Diseases Scientific Group are well aware of the burden posed by RNDs but at the national and regional level, the relative awareness is sketchy and disparate. Although many national initiatives have been undertaken to facilitate the diagnosis and management in Italy, our survey reveals that much works has to be done in supporting RNDs patients, including a deeper collaboration between politics, universities and all stakeholders in the field.

Clinical pathways of epileptic seizures and status epilepticus: results from a survey in Italy.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with seizures or status epilepticus (SE) access the hospital through emergency departments and may be admitted into different wards according to the level of care required. Clinicians with different expertise are in charge of taking critical therapeutic decisions. To date, very few studies have investigated the stage at which these patients are referred to neurologists or epileptologists and how guideline recommendations are applied in clinical practice. METHODS: A survey was used to investigate how patients with epileptic seizures or SE are managed in emergency and in subsequent hospital pathways in Italy. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-seven physicians (mainly neurologists) from all parts of Italy filled in a questionnaire. Less than half of the participants (35%) answered that, in their hospital, patients with epilepsy were managed by epileptologists. The percentages were lower for patients presenting with acute seizures (21%) or SE (16%). Diagnostic, therapeutic, and assistance pathways (PDTA) for patients presenting with seizure(s) or SE were available for both conditions in about 50% of cases, while, in the rest of the hospitals, participants indicated informal agreements (about 25% of cases) or lack of any agreement (about 25% of cases) between clinicians. Professionals more often involved in PDTA were epileptologists/neurologists, emergency physicians, and intensivists. More than half ot the participants (55%) thought that organizational issues are the most important criticalities for such patients and need to be improved (61%). SIGNIFICANCE: There is a high variability in hospital clinical pathways for epilepsy in Italy.

A survey on clinical pathways of patients with epilepsy and cerebrovascular diseases or brain tumors.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with seizures and epilepsies comorbid with cerebrovascular disorders (CVDs) or brain tumors (BTs) are managed by different specialists, including neurologists with expertise in epilepsy (epileptologists), CVDs, and neuro-oncology, as well as neurologists without special expertise (general neurologists), and also emergency room physicians (EPs), intensive care physicians, and neurosurgeons. It has never been studied how these specialists interact for the treatment of seizures or epilepsy in these patients. METHODS: A survey was used to investigate how patients with such comorbidities are managed in hospitals in Italy. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-eight specialists from hospitals in all parts of Italy filled in a questionnaire. Epileptologists were in charge of treatment of epilepsy in about 50% of cases while acute seizures were treated mainly by general neurologists (52% of cases). Diagnostic, therapeutic, and assistance pathways (PDTAs) for CVD and BT epilepsies were declared by physicians in about half of the hospitals while in about a quarter, there were only informal agreements and, in the remaining hospitals, there were no agreements between specialists. CVD neurologists, specialists in internal medicine, and EP were most often in charge of treatment of epilepsy comorbid with CVD. General neurologists, neuro-oncologists, and neurosurgeons were included in teams that manage BT epilepsies while epileptologists were included only in a small percentage of hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical decisions on epilepsy or seizures in patients with such comorbidities are often handled by different specialists. A new team culture and PDTAs are needed to guarantee high standards of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures.

Survey of Telehealth Adoption by Neuro-ophthalmologists During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Benefits, Barriers, and Utility.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth modalities have come to prominence as a strategy for providing patient care when in-person care provision opportunities are limited. The degree of adoption by neuro-ophthalmologists has not been quantified. METHODS: Telehealth utilization pre-COVID-19 and peri-COVID-19 was surveyed among practicing neuro-ophthalmologists in and outside the United States using an online platform. Demographics, perceived benefits, barriers, and utility for different neuro-ophthalmic conditions were collected. Data collection occurred over a 2-week period in May 2020. RESULTS: Two hundred eight practicing neuro-ophthalmologists (81.3% United States, 50.2% females, age range <35 to >65, mode 35-44 years) participated in the survey. Utilization of all telehealth modalities increased from pre-COVID to peri-COVID (video visit 3.9%-68.3%, P < 0.0005, remote interpretation of testing 26.7%-32.2%, P = 0.09, online second opinion 7.9%-15.3%, P = 0.001, and interprofessional e-consult 4.4%-18.7%, P < 0.0005, McNemar). The majority selected access, continuity, and patient efficiency of care as benefits and data quality as a barrier. Telehealth was felt to be most helpful for conditions relying on history, external examination, and previously collected ancillary testing and not helpful for conditions requiring funduscopic examination. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth modality usage by neuro-ophthalmologists increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Identified benefits have relevance both during and beyond COVID-19. Further work is needed to address barriers in their current and future states to maintain these modalities as viable care delivery options.

The Diagnostic Pathway From Cognitive Impairment to Dementia in Japan: Quantification Using Real-World Data.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to quantify the diagnostic pathway from cognitive impairment (CI) to dementia in Japan. METHODS: This was a real-world, cross-sectional survey of patients with CI and their physicians. RESULTS: Data for 1107 patients were provided by 106 physicians. Mean time from initial symptoms to the first consultation was 7.4±6.9 months; 42% of patients had moderate/severe CI at first consultation. Mean time from the first consultation to formal diagnosis was 2.9±11.0 months (1.9±8.8 mo if not referred to a secondary physician, and 5.1±14.6 mo if referred). Time from the first consultation to diagnosis was shorter with more severe CI at first consultation (P=0.0072). The highest proportion of patients were diagnosed by neurologists (45.8%). Tests or scales were used to aid diagnosis in 81.2% of patients. There was no association of disease severity and referral to a secondary physician; 30.9% of patients were referred, the majority (57.7%) to a neurologist. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of patients with dementia in Japan experience CI for some time before consulting a physician. Government policy to increase public understanding and awareness of dementia, and a proposed dementia screening system, should increase the proportion of individuals consulting physicians before disease progression.

Diagnosis and treatment of Guillain-Barré syndrome during the Zika virus epidemic in Brazil: A national survey study.

The Zika virus (ZIKV) epidemic in Brazil in 2015-2016 was followed by an increase in the incidence of patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS). With this national survey study, we aimed to gain a better understanding of how neurologists in Brazil are currently diagnosing and treating patients with GBS, and how this increase in incidence has impacted the management of the disease. The questionnaire consisted of 52 questions covering: personal profile of the neurologist, practice of managing GBS during and outside of the ZIKV epidemic, and limitations in managing GBS. All 3264 neurologists that were member of the Brazilian Academy of Neurology at the time of the study were invited to participate. The questionnaire was fully answered by 171 (5%) neurologists. Sixty-one percent of neurologists noticed an increase in patients with GBS during the ZIKV epidemic, and 30% experienced an increase in problems in managing GBS during this time. The most important limitations in the diagnosis and management of GBS included the availability of nerve conduction studies (NCS), beds in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and referral to rehabilitation centers. Most neurologists did not use a protocol for treating patients with GBS and the treatment practice varied. Increasing availability of NCS and beds in the ICU and rehabilitation centers, and the implementation of (inter)national guidelines, are critical in supporting Brazilian neurologist in their management of GBS, and are especially important in preparing for future outbreaks.

Specialty Classifications of Physicians Who Provide Neurocritical Care in the United States.

BACKGROUND: We sought to characterize the specialty classification of US physicians who provide critical care for neurological/neurosurgical disease. METHODS: Using inpatient claims between 2009 and 2015 from a nationally representative 5% sample of Medicare beneficiaries, we selected hospitalizations for neurological/neurosurgical diseases with potential to result in life-threatening manifestations requiring critical care. Using Current Procedural Terminology® codes, we determined the medical specialty of providers submitting critical care claims, and, using National Provider Identifier numbers, we merged in data from the United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties (UCNS) to determine whether the provider was a UCNS diplomate in neurocritical care. We defined providers with a clinical neuroscience background as neurologists, neurosurgeons, and/or UCNS diplomates in neurocritical care. We defined neurocritical care service as a critical care claim with a qualifying neurological/neurosurgical diagnosis in patients with a relevant primary hospital discharge diagnosis and ≥ 3 total critical care claims, excluding claims from the first day of hospitalization since these were mostly emergency-department claims. Our findings were reported using descriptive statistics with exact confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Among 1,952,305 Medicare beneficiaries, we identified 99,937 hospitalizations with at least one claim for neurocritical care. In our primary analysis, neurologists accounted for 28.0% (95% CI, 27.5-28.5%) of claims, neurosurgeons for 3.7% (95% CI, 3.5-3.9%), UCNS-certified neurointensivists for 25.8% (95% CI, 25.3-26.3%), and providers with any clinical neuroscience background for 42.8% (95% CI, 42.2-43.3%). The likelihood of management by physicians with a clinical neuroscience background increased proportionally with patients' county-level socioeconomic status and such providers were 3 times more likely to be based at an academic medical center than other physicians who billed for critical care in our sample (odds ratio, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.1-8.1). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians with a dedicated clinical neuroscience background accounted for less than half of neurocritical care service in US Medicare beneficiaries.

A survey of doctors on diagnosis and treatment of dementia with Lewy bodies: examination and treatment of behavioural and psychological symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) is a progressive form of dementia, accompanied by a range of behavioural and psychological symptoms. The aim of this study was to identify current clinical practice for the treatment of DLB in Japan. METHODS: We conducted a survey of medical doctors engaged in the management of dementia in Japan. Participants were divided into two groups: psychiatrists (Group P) and neurologists or neurosurgeons (Group NS). Doctors completed a questionnaire and we analysed their responses to compare the two groups with regard to diagnosis and treatment of DLB, and in particular the treatment of behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD). RESULTS: Responses suggested that Group P conducted biomarker examinations less frequently and decided on their own therapeutic strategies more frequently than did Group NS. Both groups most frequently selected hallucinations/delusions as the symptoms given highest treatment priority. More than 70% of respondents in both groups reported having difficulties in treating BPSD. Atypical antipsychotics were more frequently prescribed by Group P, but were also prescribed in 70% of patients in Group NS. A third of patients received atypical antipsychotics for more than 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: The responses to this survey highlighted the difficulties faced by clinicians managing patients with DLB and identified the need to effectively treat BPSD in such patients.

Fact-finding survey on diagnostic procedures and therapeutic interventions for parkinsonism accompanying dementia with Lewy bodies.

BACKGROUND: We performed a questionnaire survey of medical doctors engaged in the management of dementia to identify the actual status of treatment for dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) in Japan. METHODS: Among participating medical doctors, we selected neurologists (Group N) and psychiatrists (Group P) because these physicians are usually involved in the management of DLB patients. The two groups were compared based on their diagnosis and treatment of DLB and in particular, parkinsonism. RESULTS: Neurological examinations and biomarker tests were less frequently performed by Group P than Group N. Antipsychotics and other psychotropics excluding anti-dementia drugs were significantly more frequently administered by Group P than Group N. The proportion of physicians who selected L-dopa as a first-line therapy for parkinsonism was significantly higher in Group N than in Group P. Despite these between-group differences, the following findings were common to the two groups: there was a discrepancy between the symptom that patients expressed the greatest desire to treat, and the awareness of physicians regarding the treatment of these symptoms; the initial agent was L-dopa; and physicians exercised caution against the occurrence of hallucinations, delusions, and other adverse drug reactions. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present survey offer valuable insight for the formulation of future DLB therapeutic strategies.

Active Epilepsy and Seizure Control in Adults - United States, 2013 and 2015.

Approximately 3 million American adults reported active epilepsy* in 2015 (1). Active epilepsy, especially when seizures are uncontrolled, poses substantial burdens because of somatic, neurologic, and mental health comorbidity; cognitive and physical dysfunction; side effects of antiseizure medications; higher injury and mortality rates; poorer quality of life; and increased financial cost (2). Thus, prompt diagnosis and seizure control (i.e., seizure-free in the 12 months preceding the survey) confers numerous clinical and social advantages to persons with active epilepsy. To obtain recent and reliable estimates of active epilepsy and seizure control status in the U.S. population, CDC analyzed aggregated data from the 2013 and the 2015 National Health Interview Surveys (NHISs). Overall, an annual estimated 2.6 million (1.1%) U.S. adults self-reported having active epilepsy, 67% of whom had seen a neurologist or an epilepsy specialist in the past year, and 90% of whom reported taking epilepsy medication. Among those taking epilepsy medication, only 44% reported having their seizures controlled. A higher prevalence of active epilepsy and poorer seizure control were associated with low family income, unemployment, and being divorced, separated, or widowed. Use of epilepsy medication was higher among adults who saw an epilepsy specialist in the past year than among those who did not. Health care and public health should ensure that adults with uncontrolled seizures have appropriate care and self-management support in order to promote seizure control, improve health and social outcomes, and reduce health care costs.