RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Digital measures and digital health-care delivery have been rarely implemented in lower-and-middle-income countries (LMICs), contributing to worsening global disparities and inequities. Sustainable ways to implement and use digital approaches will help to improve time to access, management, and quality of life in persons with epilepsy, goals that remain unreachable in under-resourced communities. As under-resourced environments differ in human and economic resources, no one approach will be appropriate to all LMICs. AREAS COVERED: Digital health and tools to monitor and measure digital endpoints and metrics of quality of life will need to be developed or adapted to the specific needs of under-resourced areas. Portable technologies may partially address the urban-rural divide. Careful delineation of stakeholders and their engagement and alignment in all efforts is critically important if these initiatives are to be successfully sustained. Privacy issues, neglected in many regions globally, must be purposefully addressed. EXPERT OPINION: Epilepsy care in under-resourced environments has been limited by the lack of relevant technologies for diagnosis and treatment. Digital biomarkers, and investigative technological advances, may finally make it feasible to sustainably improve care delivery and ultimately quality of life including personalized epilepsy care.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The implementation of technology in the field of epileptology has traditionally focused on its use for diagnosis and treatment and has, unsurprisingly, been capital-intensive, making it therefore mainly implementable in advanced high-income countries. Because of technological innovations over the past 20 years there has been almost a paradigm shift, particularly in access to and the potential for implementing relevant technology in lesser developed environments. Nearly 80% of people living with epilepsy live in low and middle-income countries. AREAS COVERED: The challenge and the purpose of this paper is to discuss how technology can be implemented into lesser-resourced contexts not only cost-effectively but in a cost-saving way while also building capacity and thus sustainability. EXPERT OPINION: The rate of technological advancement presents the risk of progressive widening of the technology and care gaps between advanced and lesser developed regions. Implementing technology is both about finding relevant appropriate technologies for the individual contexts of a diverse range of countries but also about repurposing low-tech technologies for application in epilepsy care in these areas. Finally exciting advances such as autonomous driving, digital twinning and robotic surgery will likely transform epilepsy care in several lower-resourced settings in the next 5-10 years.
Asunto(s)
Epilepsia , Epilepsia/diagnóstico , Epilepsia/terapia , Humanos , TecnologíaRESUMEN
Mexico has the third highest diversity of passalid beetles in the World. Here we describe Tonantzin new genus, a new monotypic genus, potentially endemic to the mountains of central Mexico. The new genus is diagnosed by a new configuration of characters from the mesofrontal structure (MFS) in addition to other characters. The MFS in Passalidae has been treated either as a composite complex character or a combination of individual characters. Using a broad taxonomic sample within Proculini, we discuss the taxonomic and systematic implications of the MFS for the tribe. We define the MFS type tepetl. Given the importance of the MFS for passalid taxonomy we propose a new delimitation of the structure using boundaries based on internal and external head structures. We argue that the treatment of the MFS as a complex character better captures the nature of this structure but we ultimately find a need to standardize the way in which this structure is described in the taxonomic literature and used in phylogenetic analyses.
RESUMEN
Very little has been reported about the health resources available for patients with epilepsy in the five English-speaking southern Caribbean countries of Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados, Grenada, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Saint Lucia. There is no comprehensive resource describing their health systems, access to specialty care, antiepileptic drug (AED) use, and availability of brain imaging and EEG. The purpose of this study was to profile epilepsy care in these countries as an initial step toward improving the standard of care and identifying gaps in care to guide future policy changes. In each southern Caribbean country, we conducted study visits and interviewed health-care providers, government health ministers, pharmacy directors, hospital medical directors, pharmacists, clinic staff, radiologists, and radiology and EEG technicians. Health-care providers completed extensive epilepsy care surveys. The five countries all have integrated government health systems with clinics and hospitals that provide free or heavily subsidized care and AEDs for patients with epilepsy. Only Trinidad and Tobago and Barbados, however, have neurology specialists. The three smaller countries lack government imaging and EEG facilities. Trinidad had up to one-year waits for public MRI/EEG. Government formularies in Grenada, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Saint Lucia are limited to first-generation AEDs. One or more second-line agents are formulary in Trinidad and Barbados. Nonformulary drugs may be obtained for individual patients in Barbados. Grenada, Saint Lucia, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines participate in an Organization of Eastern Caribbean States formulary purchasing system, which added levetiracetam following the survey. Newer generic AED formulations with the lowest risks for pregnancy malformation were not in use. In conclusion, patients with epilepsy in the southern Caribbean have excellent access to government clinics and hospitals, but AED choices are limited. Local medical providers reported that the major limitations in care were lack of specialty care, lack of imaging and EEG services, financial barriers to care, long wait times for care, and limited access to additional AEDs.
Asunto(s)
Atención a la Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Epilepsia/epidemiología , Epilepsia/terapia , Anticonvulsivantes/provisión & distribución , Barbados , Región del Caribe/epidemiología , Países en Desarrollo , Utilización de Medicamentos , Electroencefalografía , Femenino , Formularios Farmacéuticos como Asunto , Personal de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Neurología/estadística & datos numéricos , Embarazo , Santa Lucia , San Vicente y las GrenadinasRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To assess the validity and reliability of a screening questionnaire administered to parents/caregivers to detect behaviors suggestive of epileptic seizures in children. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We developed a 10-item questionnaire, which was administered to 120 parents/caregivers of children attending hospital-based clinics/pediatric neurologists' offices. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to assess the discriminant ability of the questionnaire and determine cutoff points. Questionnaire sensitivity and specificity were compared with clinical assessment by a pediatrician and pediatric neurologist. The questionnaire was readministered to 25 parents/caregivers after 1 month to assess reliability. RESULTS: The 120 children had the following characteristics: 58% with epilepsy, 55% male, mean (standard deviation) age 8.1 (3.2) years. A positive response to ≥1 item had the highest sensitivity (89%) and specificity (91%), with a ROC area under curve of 0.91 (95% confidence interval: 0.86, 0.97). The validity of the questionnaire was similar to the clinical evaluation by the pediatric neurologist and pediatrician. The Spearman correlation coefficient for the total score from repeat administration of the questionnaire was 0.95 (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The UWIMONA Pediatric Epileptic Seizure Screening Questionnaire is a valid and reliable screening instrument and performed similarly when compared with evaluation by an experienced clinician.