Status Epilepticus Identification and Treatment Among Emergency Medical Services Agencies.

This cross-sectional study examines the association between unidentified status epilepticus and prehospital benzodiazepine treatment.

Hospital variation of outcomes in status epilepticus.

OBJECTIVE: Understanding factors driving variation in status epilepticus outcomes would be critical to improve care. We evaluated the degree to which patient and hospital characteristics explained hospital-to-hospital variability in intubation and postacute outcomes. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries admitted with status epilepticus between 2009 and 2019. Outcomes included intubation, discharge to a facility, and 30- and 90-day readmissions and mortality. Multilevel models calculated percent variation in each outcome due to hospital-to-hospital differences. RESULTS: We included 29 150 beneficiaries. The median age was 68 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 57-78), and 18 084 (62%) were eligible for Medicare due to disability. The median (IQR) percentages of each outcome across hospitals were: 30-day mortality 25% (0%-38%), any 30-day readmission 14% (0%-25%), 30-day status epilepticus readmission 0% (0%-3%), 30-day facility stay 40% (25%-53%), and intubation 46% (20%-61%). However, after accounting for many hospitals with small sample size, hospital-to-hospital differences accounted for 2%-6% of variation in all unadjusted outcomes, and approximately 1%-5% (maximally 8% for 30-day readmission for status epilepticus) after adjusting for patient, hospitalization, and/or hospital characteristics. Although many characteristics significantly predicted outcomes, the largest effect size was cardiac arrest predicting death (odds ratio = 10.1, 95% confidence interval = 8.8-11.7), whereas hospital characteristics (e.g., staffing, accreditation, volume, setting, services) all had lesser effects. SIGNIFICANCE: Hospital-to-hospital variation explained little variation in studied outcomes. Rather, certain patient characteristics (e.g., cardiac arrest) had greater effects. Interventions to improve outcomes after status epilepticus may be better focused on individual or prehospital factors, rather than at the inpatient systems level.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Inpatient Utilization for Acute Neurologic Disease.

Background and Objective: The initial months of the Corona Virus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in decreased hospitalizations. We aimed to describe differences in hospitalizations and related procedures across neurologic disease. Methods: In our retrospective observational study using the California State Inpatient Database and state-wide population-level estimates, we calculated neurologic hospitalization rates for a control period from January 2019 to February 2020 and a COVID-19 pandemic period from March to December 2020. We calculated incident rate ratios (IRR) for neurologic hospitalizations using negative binomial regression and compared relevant procedure rates over time. Results: Population-based neurologic hospitalization rates were 29.1 per 100,000 (95% CI 26.9-31.3) in April 2020 compared to 43.6 per 100,000 (95% CI 40.4-46.7) in January 2020. Overall, the pandemic period had 13% lower incidence of neurologic hospitalizations per month (IRR 0.87, 95% CI 0.86-0.89). The smallest decreases were in neurotrauma (IRR 0.92, 95% CI 0.89-0.95) and neuro-oncologic cases (IRR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87-0.99). Headache admissions experienced the greatest decline (IRR 0.62, 95% CI 0.58-0.66). For ischemic stroke, greater rates of endovascular thrombectomy (5.6% vs 5.0%; P < .001) were observed in the pandemic. Among all neurologic disease, greater rates of gastrostomy (4.0% vs 3.5%; P < .001), intubation/mechanical ventilation (14.3% vs 12.9%, P < .001), and tracheostomy (1.4 vs 1.2%; P < .001) were observed during the pandemic. Conclusions: During the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic there were fewer hospitalizations to varying degrees for all neurologic diagnoses. Rates of procedures indicating severe disease increased. Further study is needed to determine the impact on triage, patient outcomes, and cost consequences.

Characterizing emergency department and inpatient health care utilization after seizure-related hospitalization: A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Seizure care is a significant driver of health care costs in both emergency department (ED) and inpatient settings, but the majority of studies have focused on inpatient admissions as the only metric of health care utilization. This study aims to better characterize ED and inpatient encounters among patients with seizure to inform care and policy. METHODS: Using statewide administrative data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Databases and State Emergency Department Databases from Florida and New York, we identified patients with a seizure-related index hospitalization between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018. Among this cohort, we examined the incidence and characteristics of subsequent acute care visits in the ED and inpatient settings for 365 days after initial hospital discharge. RESULTS: A total of 54 456 patients had an eligible seizure-related hospitalization. Patients were 49% female, predominantly White (64%) and non-Hispanic (84%), and used a public primary payer (68%). There were 36 838 (68%) patients with at least one acute care visit in the year following discharge. Overall, patients had a median of 2 (interquartile [IQR] = 1-5) subsequent acute care visits and the median time to first acute care visit was 53 days (IQR = 15-138). Of the 154 369 subsequent acute care visits, 97 399 (63%) were ED-only visits, 56 970 (37%) were readmissions, and 37 176 (24%) were seizure-related. There were 18 786 patients (35%) with four or more acute care visits over 365 days of follow-up. Patients with four or more visits contributed 84% of acute care visits and 78% of costs after initial hospitalization. SIGNIFICANCE: The majority of patients hospitalized for seizure return to the ED or hospital at least once in the year after discharge. A small portion of patients account for the majority of ED and inpatient visits as well as health care costs associated with this population, identifying a subgroup of patients who may benefit from improved inpatient and outpatient management.

Care Ecosystem Collaborative Model and Health Care Costs in Medicare Beneficiaries With Dementia: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Collaborative dementia care programs are effective in addressing the needs of patients with dementia and their caregivers. However, attempts to consider effects on health care spending have been limited, leaving a critical gap in the conversation around value-based dementia care. Objective: To determine the effect of participation in collaborative dementia care on total Medicare reimbursement costs compared with usual care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a prespecified secondary analysis of the Care Ecosystem trial, a 12-month, single-blind, parallel-group randomized clinical trial conducted from March 2015 to March 2018 at 2 academic medical centers in California and Nebraska. Participants were patients with dementia who were living in the community, aged 45 years or older, and had a primary caregiver and Medicare fee-for-service coverage for the duration of the trial. Intervention: Telehealth dementia care program that entailed assignment to an unlicensed dementia care guide who provided caregiver support, standardized education, and connection to licensed dementia care specialists. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was the sum of all Medicare claim payments during study enrollment, excluding Part D (drugs). Results: Of the 780 patients in the Care Ecosystem trial, 460 (59.0%) were eligible for and included in this analysis. Patients had a median (IQR) age of 78 (72-84) years, and 256 (55.7%) identified as female. Participation in collaborative dementia care reduced the total cost of care by $3290 from 1 to 6 months postenrollment (95% CI, -$6149 to -$431; P = .02) and by $3027 from 7 to 12 months postenrollment (95% CI, -$5899 to -$154; P = .04), corresponding overall to a mean monthly cost reduction of $526 across 12 months. An evaluation of baseline predictors of greater cost reduction identified trends for recent emergency department visit (-$5944; 95% CI, -$10 336 to -$1553; interaction P = .07) and caregiver depression (-$6556; 95% CI, -$11 059 to -$2052; interaction P = .05). Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial among Medicare beneficiaries with dementia, the Care Ecosystem model was associated with lower total cost of care compared with usual care. Collaborative dementia care programs are a cost-effective, high-value model for dementia care. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02213458.

Clinical and Radiographic Characteristics of Nocardia vs Non-Nocardia Brain Abscesses.

Background and Objectives: Diagnosis and treatment of CNS nocardiosis is challenging and often delayed, which increases morbidity and mortality. The primary objective was to compare the clinical and radiographic characteristics of patients with CNS nocardiosis with non-Nocardia bacterial brain abscesses. Methods: We performed a case-control study of patients with brain abscesses diagnosed between 1998 and 2018 at a tertiary academic center. We identified 56 patients with brain MRI demonstrating brain abscess from the institutional imaging database: 14 with culture-confirmed nocardiosis and 42 randomly selected prevalent controls with culture-confirmed non-Nocardia bacterial infection. The primary outcomes were the diagnosis of concomitant lung infection and history of immunosuppression. Secondary outcomes included abscess radiographic characteristics: multifocality, occipital lobe and/or infratentorial location, and bilobed morphology. Results: Compared with patients with non-Nocardia brain abscesses, patients with CNS nocardiosis were older (median 61 years [IQR 59-69] vs 48 years [IQR 34-61]; p = 0.03), more likely to be immunosuppressed [71% (10) vs 19% (8); p < 0.001), have diabetes (36% (5) vs 10% [4]; p = 0.03), or a concomitant lung infection (86% [12] vs 2% [1]; p < 0.001). Radiographically, more cases of CNS nocardiosis exhibited multifocal abscesses (29% [4] vs 2% [1]; p = 0.01), which were located in the infratentorial (43% [6] vs 10% (4); p = 0.01) or occipital (36% [5] vs 5% [2]; p = 0.008) regions and had a bilobed (as opposed to unilobed) morphology (79% [11] vs 19% [8]; p < 0.001). Blood and CSF cultures were negative in most of the cases and controls, whereas neurosurgical specimen culture yielded a diagnosis in 100% of specimens. Discussion: Patients with CNS nocardiosis were more likely to be older, have a history of diabetes or immunosuppression, or have a concomitant lung infection compared with those with non-Nocardia brain abscesses. Abscesses because of CNS nocardiosis were more likely to be multifocal, affect the infratentorial region or occipital lobe, or have a bilobed appearance. Neurosurgical specimen culture was most likely to yield a diagnosis for both Nocardia and non-Nocardia abscesses. The combination of clinical and imaging findings may suggest CNS nocardiosis and inform early initiation of targeted empiric treatment.

Hospital EEG Capability and Associations With Interhospital Transfer in Status Epilepticus.

Background and Objectives: EEG is widely recommended for status epilepticus (SE) management. However, EEG access and use across the United States is poorly characterized. We aimed to evaluate changes in inpatient EEG access over time and whether availability of EEG is associated with interhospital transfers for patients hospitalized with SE. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study using data available in the National Inpatient Sample data set from 2012 to 2018. We identified hospitals that used continuous or routine EEG during at least 1 seizure-related hospitalization in a given year using ICD-9 and ICD-10 procedure codes and defined these hospitals as EEG capable. We examined annual change in the proportion of hospitals that were EEG capable during the study period, compared characteristics of hospitals that were EEG capable with those that were not, and fit multivariable logistic regression models to determine whether hospital EEG capability was associated with likelihood of interhospital transfer. Results: Among 4,550 hospitals in 2018, 1,241 (27.3%) were EEG capable. Of these, 1,188 hospitals (95.7%) were in urban settings. From 2012 to 2018, the proportion of hospitals that were EEG capable increased in urban settings (30.5%-41.1%, Mann-Kendall [M-K] test p < 0.001) and decreased in rural settings (4.0%-3.2%, M-K p = 0.026). Among 130,580 patients hospitalized with SE, 80,725 (61.8%) presented directly to an EEG-capable hospital. However, EEG use during hospitalization varied from 8% to 98%. Initial admission to a hospital without EEG capability was associated with 22% increased likelihood of interhospital transfer (adjusted RR 1.22, [95% CI, 1.09-1.37]; p < 0.01). Among those hospitalized at an EEG-capable hospital, patients admitted to hospitals in the lowest quintile of EEG volume were more than 2 times more likely to undergo interhospital transfer (adjusted RR 2.22, [95% CI 1.65-2.93]; p < 0.001). Discussion: A minority of hospitals are EEG capable yet care for most patients with SE. Inpatient EEG use, however, varies widely among EEG-capable hospitals, and lack of inpatient EEG access is associated with interhospital transfer. Given the high incidence and cost of SE, there is a need to better understand the importance and use of EEG in this patient population to further organize inpatient epilepsy systems of care to optimize outcomes.

Effect of collaborative dementia care on potentially inappropriate medication use: Outcomes from the Care Ecosystem randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) cause adverse events and death. We evaluate the Care Ecosystem (CE) collaborative dementia care program on medication use among community-dwelling persons living with dementia (PLWD). METHODS: Secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial (RCT) comparing CE to usual care (UC) on changes in PIMs, over 12 months between March 2015 and May 2020. Secondary outcomes included change in number of medications, clinically relevant PIMs, and anti-dementia medications. RESULTS: Of 804 PLWD, N = 490 had complete medication data. The CE resulted in significantly fewer PIMs compared to UC (-0.35; 95% CI, -0.49 to -0.20; P < 0.0001). Number needed to prevent an increase in 1 PIM was 3. Total medications, PIMs for dementia or cognitive impairment, CNS-active PIMs, anticholinergics, benzodiazepines, and opioids were also fewer. Anti-dementia medication regimens were modified more frequently. CONCLUSION: The CE medication review intervention embedded in collaborative dementia care optimized medication use among PLWD. HIGHLIGHTS: Compared to usual care (UC), the Care Ecosystem (CE) medication review intervention prevented increases in potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). Use of anticholinergics, benzodiazepines, and opioids were significantly reduced, with a trend for antipsychotics. Anti-dementia medications were adjusted more frequently. The CE medication review intervention embedded in collaborative dementia care optimized medication use.

Real-World Midazolam Use and Outcomes With Out-of-Hospital Treatment of Status Epilepticus in the United States.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Guidelines recommend 10-mg intramuscular midazolam as the first-line treatment option for status epilepticus. However, in real-world practice, it is frequently administered intranasally or intravenously and is dosed lower. Therefore, we used conventional and instrumental variable approaches to examine the effectiveness of midazolam in a national out-of-hospital cohort. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of adults with status epilepticus used the ESO Data Collaborative research dataset (January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2019). The exposures were the route and dose of midazolam. We performed hierarchical logistic regression and 2-stage least squares regression using agency treatment patterns as an instrument to examine our outcomes, rescue therapy, and ventilatory support. RESULTS: There were 7,634 out-of-hospital encounters from 657 EMS agencies. Midazolam was administered intranasally in 20%, intravenously in 46%, and intramuscularly in 35% of the encounters. Compared with intramuscular administration, intranasal midazolam increased (risk difference [RD], 6.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4% to 10.5%) and intravenous midazolam decreased (RD, -11.1%; 95% CI, -14.7% to -7.5%) the risk of rescue therapy. The differences in ventilatory support were not statistically significant (intranasal RD, -1.5%; 95% CI, -3.2% to 0.3%; intravenous RD, -0.3%; 95% CI, -1.9% to 1.2%). Higher doses were associated with a lower risk of rescue therapy (RD, -2.6%; 95% CI, -3.3% to -1.9%) and increased ventilatory support (RD, 0.4%; 95% CI, 0.1% to 0.7%). The instrumental variable analysis yielded similar results, except that dose was not associated with ventilatory support. CONCLUSION: The route and dose of midazolam affect clinical outcomes. Compared with intramuscular administration, intranasal administration may be less effective and intravenous administration more effective in terminating status epilepticus, although the differences between these and previous results may reflect the nature of real-world data as opposed to randomized data.

Migraine, Migraine Disability, Trauma, and Discrimination in Sexual and Gender Minority Individuals.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to describe migrainous headache frequency and severity and to examine the relationship between trauma, discrimination, and migraine-associated disability in a sample of sexual and/or gender minority (SGM) adults. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of SGM people in The Population Research in Identity and Disparities for Equality (PRIDE) Study from August-October 2018. The primary exposure was any trauma or discrimination, regardless of attribution. The primary outcome was moderate-severe migraine disability, as defined by a Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) Questionnaire score ≥11. We performed descriptive analysis comparing respondents with any migrainous headache to those without. Multivariable logistic regression examined the association between trauma/discrimination and migraine disability, controlling first for sociodemographic and clinical factors and then for psychiatric comorbidities. RESULTS: Of the 3,325 total respondents, 1,126 (33.9%) screened positive for migrainous headache by ID-Migraine criteria. Most people with migraine self-reported moderate (n=768, 68.2%) or severe (n=253, 22.5%) intensity. The median MIDAS score was 11 (interquartile range [IQR] 5-25). Most respondents with migraine (n=1055, 93.7%) reported a history of trauma or discrimination. In unadjusted analysis, exposure to both trauma and discrimination was associated with higher odds of moderate-severe disability (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.34-2.32). After adjustment for self-reported psychiatric comorbidities of anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder, this association lost statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Migrainous headache is common among our sample of SGM adults, and prior experiences with trauma and discrimination is associated with increased migraine disability. Our findings suggest that psychiatric comorbidities play a significant role in this relationship, identifying a potentially modifiable risk factor for disability in SGM people with migraine.

COVID-19 severity and age increase the odds of delirium in hospitalized adults with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Despite recognition of the neurologic and psychiatric complications associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, the relationship between coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) severity on hospital admission and delirium in hospitalized patients is poorly understood. This study sought to measure the association between COVID-19 severity and presence of delirium in both intensive care unit (ICU) and acute care patients by leveraging an existing hospital-wide systematic delirium screening protocol. The secondary analyses included measuring the association between age and presence of delirium, as well as the association between delirium and safety attendant use, restraint use, discharge home, and length of stay. METHODS: In this single center retrospective cohort study, we obtained electronic medical record (EMR) data using the institutional Epic Clarity database to identify all adults diagnosed with COVID-19 and hospitalized for at least 48-h from February 1-July 15, 2020. COVID-19 severity was classified into four groups. These EMR data include twice-daily delirium screenings of all patients using the Nursing Delirium Screening Scale (non-ICU) or CAM-ICU (ICU) per existing hospital-wide protocols. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, of whom 44 patients required ICU care and 17 met criteria for severe disease within 24-h of admission. Forty-three patients (43%) met criteria for delirium at any point in their hospitalization. Of patients with delirium, 24 (56%) were 65 years old or younger. After adjustment, patients meeting criteria for the two highest COVID-19 severity groups within 24-h of admission had 7.2 times the odds of having delirium compared to those in the lowest category [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 7.2; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.9, 27.4; P = 0.003]. Patients > 65 years old had increased odds of delirium compared to those < 45 years old (aOR 8.7; 95% CI 2.2, 33.5; P = 0.003). Delirium was associated with increased odds of safety attendant use (aOR 4.5; 95% CI 1.0, 20.7; P = 0.050), decreased odds of discharge home (aOR 0.2; 95% CI 0.06, 0.6; P = 0.005), and increased length of stay (aOR 7.5; 95% CI 2.0, 13; P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: While delirium is common in hospitalized patients of all ages with COVID-19, it is especially common in those with severe disease on hospital admission and those who are older. Patients with COVID-19 and delirium, compared to COVID-19 without delirium, are more likely to require safety attendants during hospitalization, less likely to be discharged home, and have a longer length of stay. Individuals with COVID-19, including younger patients, represent an important population to target for delirium screening and management as delirium is associated with important differences in both clinical care and disposition.

Amyloid-ß related angiitis presenting as eosinophilic meningitis: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic meningitis is uncommon and often attributed to infectious causes. CASE PRESENTATION: We describe a case of a 72-year-old man who presented with subacute onset eosinophilic meningitis, vasculitis, and intracranial hypertension with progressive and severe neurologic symptoms. Brain MRI demonstrated multifocal strokes and co-localized right temporo-parieto-occipital vasogenic edema, cortical superficial siderosis, and diffuse leptomeningeal enhancement. He ultimately underwent brain biopsy with immunohistochemical stains for amyloid-ß and Congo red that were extensively positive in the blood vessel walls and in numerous diffuse and neuritic parenchymal confirming a diagnosis of amyloid-ß related angiitis. He was treated with immunosuppression with clinical stabilization. CONCLUSIONS: Amyloid-ß related angiitis is an underrecognized cause of eosinophilic meningitis that can present fulminantly and is typically responsive to immunosuppression. The presence of eosinophils may provide additional clues to the underlying pathophysiology of amyloid-ß related angiitis.

Management of Status Epilepticus and Indications for Inpatient Electroencephalography Monitoring.

Status epilepticus (SE) is a neurologic emergency requiring immediate time-sensitive treatment to minimize neuronal injury and systemic complications. Minimizing time to administration of first- and second-line therapy is necessary to optimize the chances of successful seizure termination in generalized convulsive SE (GCSE). The approach to refractory and superrefractory GCSE is less well defined. Multiple agents with differing complementary actions that facilitate seizure termination are recommended. Nonconvulsive SE (NCSE) has a wide range of presentations and approaches to treatment. Continuous electroencephalography is critical to the management of both GCSE and NCSE, while its use for patients without seizure continues to expand.

Preparing Neurology Residents and Advanced Practice Providers for the COVID-19 ICU-A Neurocritical Care Led Intervention.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: With the surge of critically ill COVID-19 patients, neurology and neurosurgery residents and advanced practice providers (APPs) were deployed to intensive care units (ICU). These providers lacked relevant critical care training. We investigated whether a focused video-based learning curriculum could effectively teach high priority intensive care topics in this unprecedented setting to these neurology providers. METHODS: Neurocritical care clinicians led a multidisciplinary team in developing a 2.5-hour lecture series covering the critical care management of COVID-19 patients. We examined whether provider confidence, stress, and knowledge base improved after viewing the lectures. RESULTS: A total of 88 residents and APPs participated across 2 academic institutions. 64 participants (73%) had not spent time as an ICU provider. After viewing the lecture series, the proportion of providers who felt moderately, quite, or extremely confident increased from 11% to 72% (60% difference, 95% CI 49-72%) and the proportion of providers who felt nervous/stressed, very nervous/stressed, or extremely nervous/stressed decreased from 78% to 48% (38% difference, 95% CI 26-49%). Scores on knowledge base questions increased an average of 2.5 out of 12 points (SD 2.1; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A targeted, asynchronous curriculum on critical care COVID-19 management led to significantly increased confidence, decreased stress, and improved knowledge among resident trainees and APPs. This curriculum could serve as an effective didactic resource for neurology providers preparing for the COVID-19 ICU.