Treating Rhythmic and Periodic EEG Patterns in Comatose Survivors of Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: Whether the treatment of rhythmic and periodic electroencephalographic (EEG) patterns in comatose survivors of cardiac arrest improves outcomes is uncertain. METHODS: We conducted an open-label trial of suppressing rhythmic and periodic EEG patterns detected on continuous EEG monitoring in comatose survivors of cardiac arrest. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to a stepwise strategy of antiseizure medications to suppress this activity for at least 48 consecutive hours plus standard care (antiseizure-treatment group) or to standard care alone (control group); standard care included targeted temperature management in both groups. The primary outcome was neurologic outcome according to the score on the Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) scale at 3 months, dichotomized as a good outcome (CPC score indicating no, mild, or moderate disability) or a poor outcome (CPC score indicating severe disability, coma, or death). Secondary outcomes were mortality, length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU), and duration of mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: We enrolled 172 patients, with 88 assigned to the antiseizure-treatment group and 84 to the control group. Rhythmic or periodic EEG activity was detected a median of 35 hours after cardiac arrest; 98 of 157 patients (62%) with available data had myoclonus. Complete suppression of rhythmic and periodic EEG activity for 48 consecutive hours occurred in 49 of 88 patients (56%) in the antiseizure-treatment group and in 2 of 83 patients (2%) in the control group. At 3 months, 79 of 88 patients (90%) in the antiseizure-treatment group and 77 of 84 patients (92%) in the control group had a poor outcome (difference, 2 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, -7 to 11; P = 0.68). Mortality at 3 months was 80% in the antiseizure-treatment group and 82% in the control group. The mean length of stay in the ICU and mean duration of mechanical ventilation were slightly longer in the antiseizure-treatment group than in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: In comatose survivors of cardiac arrest, the incidence of a poor neurologic outcome at 3 months did not differ significantly between a strategy of suppressing rhythmic and periodic EEG activity with the use of antiseizure medication for at least 48 hours plus standard care and standard care alone. (Funded by the Dutch Epilepsy Foundation; TELSTAR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02056236.).

Translating Evidence to Advanced Parkinson's Disease Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

In the advanced stages of Parkinson's disease (PD), patients frequently experience disabling motor complications. Treatment options include deep brain stimulation (DBS), levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG), and continuous subcutaneous apomorphine infusion (CSAI). Choosing among these treatments is influenced by scientific evidence, clinical expertise, and patient preferences. To foster patient engagement in decision-making among the options, scientific evidence should be adjusted to their information needs. We conducted a systematic review from the patient perspective. First, patients selected outcomes for a treatment choice: quality of life, activities of daily living, ON and OFF time, and adverse events. Second, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis for each treatment versus best medical treatment using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Finally, the evidence was transformed into comprehensible and comparable information. We converted the meta-analysis results into the number of patients (per 100) who benefit clinically from an advanced treatment per outcome, based on the minimal clinically important difference and the cumulative distribution function. Although this approach allows for a comparison of outcomes across the three device-aided therapies, they have never been compared directly. The interpretation is hindered by the relatively short follow-up time in the included studies, usually less than 12 months. These limitations should be clarified to patients during the decision-making process. This review can help patients integrate the evidence with their own preferences, and with their clinician's expertise, to reach an informed decision. © 2021 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

The Patient's Perspective on Shared Decision-Making in Advanced Parkinson's Disease: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study.

Background: Choosing between deep brain stimulation (DBS), Levodopa-Carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG), or continuous subcutaneous Apomorphine infusion (CSAI) in advanced Parkinson's disease is a complex decision. It is paramount to combine evidence with the professional's expertise and the patient's preferences. The patient's preferences can be elicited and integrated into the treatment choice through shared decision-making (SDM). Objective: In this cross-sectional survey study we explored patient's involvement in decision-making and identified facilitators and barriers for shared decision-making (SDM) in advanced Parkinson from the patient's perspective. Methods: We invited 180 Dutch persons with Parkinson who started DBS, LCIG, or CSAI in the previous 3 years to complete a questionnaire. Questions covered three topics; (1) preferred and experienced roles in the decision process for an advanced treatment, (2) information needs to make a decision and actually received information, and (3) factors that had positively or negatively influenced shared decision-making (SDM). Results: One hundred and twenty one participants completed the questionnaire. The large majority preferred to be involved in the decision-making (93%), and most respondents had experienced an active role (85%). In about half of the respondents (47%), their preferred role did not match their experienced role; 28% had a more active role than they would have preferred. Although 77% perceived to be fully informed at the time of decision, only 41% stated they knew all three therapeutic options. Participants identified the most important facilitators for shared decision-making (SDM) at the patient's level (i.e., perceiving the decision to be his own choice), at the neurologist's level (i.e., having expertise on all treatment options, and taking time for the decision), and within the professional-patient relationship (i.e., trust and having an open discussion). The main barriers for shared decision-making (SDM) existed at the patient's level (i.e., perceiving there is no choice), neurologist's level (own treatment preference), and organizational level (i.e., no research available that compares treatments, multiple professionals involved, and lack of consultation time). Conclusions: Patients want to be involved and feel involved when choosing an advanced treatment, but often do not know all treatment options. Implementation of true patient involvement needs personalized information provision on all treatment options and improvement on how this information is communicated.

The Diagnostic Sensitivity for Ulnar Neuropathy at the Elbow Is Not Increased by Addition of Needle EMG of ADM and FDI When Nerve Conduction Studies Are Normal.

Introduction: The main objective of this study was to investigate whether electromyography (EMG) has additional value in the confirmation of the clinical diagnosis of ulnar nerve entrapment at the elbow (UNE) if nerve conduction studies (NCS) are normal. Methods: A prospective cross-sectional cohort observational study was conducted among patients with the clinical suspicion of UNE. A total of 199 arms were included, who were examined according to a standard neurophysiological protocol, i.e., NCS and EMG relevant to the ulnar nerve. Results: NCS were normal in 76 (38.2%) arms. No abnormal spontaneous muscle fiber activity was found with EMG in any of these cases. In 9 arms with normal NCS (11.8%), isolated abnormal MUAP configurations were found with EMG. Of these nine arms one UNE was diagnosed clinically, in which additional ultrasound and repeated NCS/EMG were negative. One had already been diagnosed with neuralgic amyotrophy and one with CTS. The other 6 arms had additional diagnostics which did not reveal an UNE. Conclusion: EMG as part of the standard neurophysiological protocol exclusively in the confirmation of the clinical diagnosis of UNE has limited added value if NCS are normal in a high prior-odds setting. However, removing EMG may prevent detecting concomitant and/or additional differential diagnoses.

Improving shared decision-making in advanced Parkinson's disease: protocol of a mixed methods feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: In advanced stages of Parkinson's disease (PD), patients and neurologists regularly face complex treatment decisions. Shared decision-making (SDM) can support the process where evidence, the clinician's expertise and the patient's preferences jointly contribute to reach an optimal decision. Here, we describe the rationale of our feasibility study protocol.The aim of the study is to test the feasibility of the SDM intervention by (1) analysing the acceptability of the intervention by users (i.e. professionals and patients), (2) assessing the level of implementation, (3) testing efficacy on a small scale and (4) evaluating the study procedures. METHODS: Using an uncontrolled before-after mixed methods design, patients in the pre-intervention group will receive information and decisional support as usual. Patients in the post-intervention group will receive the SDM intervention, consisting of an Option Grid™ patient decision aid and a website with supplementary information plus a value clarification tool for both patients and professionals. An Option Grid is a one-page, evidence-based summary of available options, listing the frequently asked questions that patients consider when making treatment decisions. A value clarification tool helps patients identify which option he/she prefers based on attributes in the treatment decision context. Neurologists and PD nurse specialists will receive a 1-h instruction on SDM and how to use the SDM intervention.Through purposive sampling, neurologists and PD nurse specialists will be recruited from both specialised neurology clinics and community-based hospitals. Included professionals will invite consecutive patients who are eligible for the advanced therapies.Data will be collected using questionnaires, interviews and audio observations of the consultations and by tracking users' logging behaviour of the website. Data will be analysed using a mixed methods design. DISCUSSION: The mixed methods design will create a deeper understanding of how the SDM intervention affects the interactions between professionals (a neurologist and/or a PD nurse specialist) and the patient, when an advanced treatment is chosen. The results of the study will inform the design of an RCT to test the effectiveness of the SDM intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR6649, retrospectively registered 28 August 2017.

Choosing an Advanced Therapy in Parkinson's Disease; is it an Evidence-Based Decision in Current Practice?

BACKGROUND: In advanced Parkinson's disease (PD), neurologists and patients face a complex decision for an advanced therapy. When choosing a treatment, the best available evidence should be combined with the professional's expertise and the patient's preferences. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to explore current decision-making in advanced PD. METHODS: We conducted focus group discussions and individual interviews with patients (N = 20) who had received deep brain stimulation, Levodopa-Carbidopa intestinal gel, or subcutaneous apomorphine infusion, and with their caregivers (N = 16). Furthermore, we conducted semi-structured interviews with neurologists (N = 7) and PD nurse specialists (N = 3) to include the perspectives of all key players in this decision-making process. Data were analyzed by two researchers using a qualitative thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Four themes representing current experiences with the decision-making process were identified: 1) information and information needs, 2) factors influencing treatment choice and individual decision strategies, 3) decision-making roles, and 4) barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making (SDM). Patient preferences were taken into account, however patients were not always provided with adequate information. The professional's expertise influenced the decision-making process in both positive and negative ways. Although professionals and patients considered SDM essential for the decision of an advanced treatment, they mentioned several barriers for the implementation in current practice. CONCLUSIONS: In this study we found several factors explaining why in current practice, evidence-based decision-making in advanced PD is not optimal. An important first step would be to develop objective information on all treatment options.

Multidisciplinary Collaboration in Professional Networks for PD A Mixed-Method Analysis.

BACKGROUND: ParkinsonNet, a nationwide organization with regionally oriented professional health networks in TheNetherlands, aims to improve the quality of Parkinson care. Facilitation of multidisciplinary collaboration is a key objective of ParkinsonNet. OBJECTIVES: This study examined whether the concept enhances multidisciplinary collaboration between healthcare professionals involved in Parkinson care. METHODS: A regional network involving 101 healthcare professionals was newly established. Participants received two questionnaires. One aimed at documenting direct working relationships ('connections') between professionals and the other aimed at evaluating multidisciplinary team performance. Additionally, thirteen healthcare professionals were interviewed to identify barriers and facilitators for multidisciplinary collaboration. 'Social network analysis' focused on sub-networks around three community hospitals at baseline and one year after the implementation. RESULTS: The number of 'knowing each other' connections increased from 1431 to 2175 (52% , p <  0.001) and 'professional contact' connections increased from 664 to 891 (34% , p <  0.001). Large differences between sub-networks were found, positive changes being associated with a central role of neurologists and nurse specialists committed to multidisciplinary care. The perceived team performance did not change. Participants experienced problems with information exchange and interdisciplinary communication. Generally, participants were unaware of other healthcare professionals involved in individual patients and what treatments they provide simultaneously. CONCLUSIONS: ParkinsonNet partially enhanced multidisciplinary collaboration between healthcare professionals involved in Parkinson care. Crucial facilitators of this were a central role of nurse specialists and the commitment to collaborate with and refer to expert therapists among neurologists. Additional measures are needed to further improve multidisciplinary care across different institutions and around individual patients.

Moving from physician-centered care towards patient-centered care for Parkinson's disease patients.

Today's society is changing rapidly and individuals increasingly favor an active role in designing their own lives. Contemporary patients are no exception, but the present health care system-which is organized primarily from the provider's perspective-is not yet prepared for this development. Here, we argue that an alternative way to organize health care, namely more from the patient's perspective, may help to contain costs, while improving the quality, safety and access to care. This involves a redefinition of the patient-doctor relationship, such that patients are no longer regarded as passive objects, but rather as active subjects who work as partners with health care professionals to optimize health ('participatory medicine'). The opportunities that come with such a collaborative and patient-centered care model are reviewed within the context of patients with Parkinson's disease. We also discuss societal and Parkinson-specific barriers that could impede implementation of this alternative care model to the management of Parkinson's disease and other chronic conditions.

Effects of aging on recognition of intentionally and incidentally stored words: an fMRI study.

Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) was used to gain more insight in the mechanism underlying a decline in recognition memory function with age. Twelve young (23-27 years) and 12 older (63-67 years) healthy men performed two types of word encoding tasks, in which words were either incidentally or intentionally encoded for storage in memory. After a 30min delay, participants performed a recognition task. Older participants were less accurate and slower than young on the recognition task. In the both groups, successful retrieval was accompanied by activation in the left inferior frontal gyrus, left precentral gyrus and right cerebellum. Older participants showed additional activity in the bilateral medial prefrontal gyrus and right parahippocampal gyrus. Correlational analyses showed that only the additional parahippocampal activation correlated positively with task performance in the older but not young participants, suggesting that activation in this area served the purpose of functional compensation. The additional activation in the medial prefrontal cortex, on the other hand, was explained in terms of increased conflict, that is, reduced distinction between target and distracter words leading to increased simultaneous activity of both response tendencies. In a comparison between incidentally and intentionally remembered words the young group showed additional activation in the right middle occipital gyrus. This last result was explained in terms of strategic differences between the young and older group.