A global survey on the attitudes of neurologists and psychiatrists about functional/psychogenic/dissociative/nonepileptic-seizures/attacks, in the search of its name.

PURPOSE: We conducted an observational study to investigate the opinions of neurologists and psychiatrists all around the world who are taking care of patients with seizures [epilepsy and functional seizures (FS)]. METHODS: Practicing neurologists and psychiatrists from around the world were invited to participate in an online survey. On 29th September 2022, an e-mail including a questionnaire was sent to the members of the International Research in Epilepsy (IR-Epil) Consortium. The study was closed on 1st March 2023. The survey, conducted in English, included questions about physicians' opinions about FS and anonymously collected data. RESULTS: In total, 1003 physicians from different regions of the world participated in the study. Both neurologists and psychiatrists identified "seizures" as their preferred term. Overall, the most preferred modifiers for "seizures" were "psychogenic" followed by "functional" by both groups. Most participants (57.9%) considered FS more difficult to treat compared to epilepsy. Both psychological and biological problems were considered as the underlying cause of FS by 61% of the respondents. Psychotherapy was considered the first treatment option for patients with FS (79.9%). CONCLUSION: Our study represents the first large-scale attempt of investigating physicians attitudes and opinions about a condition that is both frequent and clinically important. It shows that there is a broad spectrum of terms used by physicians to refer to FS. It also suggests that the biopsychosocial model has gained its status as a widely used framework to interpret and inform clinical practice on the management of patients.

Depression, Anxiety, and Suicide After Stroke: A Narrative Review of the Best Available Evidence.

Depression and anxiety each affect around 1 in 3 people during the first year after a stroke. Suicide causes the death of about 3 to 4/1000 stroke survivors during the first 5 years. This narrative review describes the best available evidence for the epidemiology of depression, anxiety, and suicide; their prevention; and the treatment of anxiety and depression. We conclude with directions for future research.

Counseling about sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP): A global survey of neurologists' opinions.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the opinions and attitudes of neurologists on the counseling about sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) worldwide. METHODS: Practicing neurologists from around the world were invited to participate in an online survey. On February 18th, 2021, we emailed an invitation including a questionnaire (using Google-forms) to the lead neurologists from 50 countries. The survey anonymously collected the demographic data of the participants and answers to the questions about their opinions and attitudes toward counseling about SUDEP. RESULTS: In total, 1123 neurologists from 27 countries participated; 41.5% of the respondents reported they discuss the risk of SUDEP with patients and their care-givers only rarely. Specific subgroups of patients who should especially be told about this condition were considered to be those with poor antiseizure medication (ASM) adherence, frequent tonic-clonic seizures, or with drug-resistant epilepsy. The propensity to tell all patients with epilepsy (PWE) about SUDEP was higher among those with epilepsy fellowship. Having an epilepsy fellowship and working in an academic setting were factors associated with a comfortable discussion about SUDEP. There were significant differences between the world regions. CONCLUSION: Neurologists often do not discuss SUDEP with patients and their care-givers. While the results of this study may not be representative of practitioners in each country, it seems that there is a severe dissociation between the clinical significance of SUDEP and the amount of attention that is devoted to this matter in daily practice by many neurologists around the world.

Working restrictions and disability benefits eligibility in patients with functional (psychogenic) seizures: An international survey of physicians' opinions.

OBJECTIVES: In this international study, we aimed to investigate the opinions of physicians dealing with patients with functional seizures (FS) worldwide on working restrictions and disability benefits eligibility. METHODS: International online survey of neurologists/mental health professionals from Argentina, Venezuela, Colombia, Italy, France, Iran, Iraq, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Georgia, and Russia. RESULTS: Six hundred and twenty-seven physicians from 12 countries participated in the study. Working as a neurologist was a predictor to think that patients with FS should not be counseled to avoid performing all jobs or professions as long as they have active disease (OR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.30 to 0.68; p < 0.001). Having managed more than 200 patients was associated with the opinion that patients should not be counseled to avoid performing any type of work (OR: 2.17; 95% CI: 1.02 to 4.59; p = 0.043). Working as a psychiatrist/psychologist was associated with the idea that patients with FS should be qualified for disability benefits (OR: 1.97; 95% CI: 1.21-3.21; p = 0.006), and receive these benefits lifelong (OR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.22-0.84; p = 0.014). CONCLUSION: Neurologists and mental health professionals have different attitudes and opinions toward working restrictions and disability benefits for patients with FS. Further studies should investigate the reasons for these differences, and propose solutions to avoid discrimination and unequal access to employment and disability benefits.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for stroke recovery.

BACKGROUND: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) might theoretically reduce post-stroke disability by direct effects on the brain. This Cochrane Review was first published in 2012 and last updated in 2019. OBJECTIVES: To determine if SSRIs are more effective than placebo or usual care at improving outcomes in people less than 12 months post-stroke, and to determine whether treatment with SSRIs is associated with adverse effects. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 7 January 2021), Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL, Issue 7 of 12, 7 January 2021), MEDLINE (1946 to 7 January 2021), Embase (1974 to 7 January 2021), CINAHL (1982 to 7 January 2021), PsycINFO (1985 to 7 January 2021), and AMED (1985 to 7 January 2021). PsycBITE had previously been searched (16 July 2018). We searched clinical trials registers. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting stroke survivors within the first year. The intervention was any SSRI, at any dose, for any period, and for any indication. The comparator was usual care or placebo. Studies reporting at least one of our primary (disability score or independence) or secondary outcomes (impairments, depression, anxiety, quality of life, fatigue, cognition, healthcare cost, death, adverse events and leaving the study early) were included in the meta-analysis. The primary analysis included studies at low risk of bias. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data on demographics, stroke type and, our pre-specified outcomes, and bias sources. Two review authors independently extracted data. We used mean difference (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous variables, and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous variables, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed bias risks and applied GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 76 eligible studies (13,029 participants); 75 provided data at end of treatment, and of these two provided data at follow-up. Thirty-eight required participants to have depression to enter. The duration, drug, and dose varied. Six studies were at low risk of bias across all domains; all six studies did not need participants to have depression to enter, and all used fluoxetine. Of these six studies, there was little to no difference in disability between groups SMD -0.0; 95% CI -0.05 to 0.05; 5 studies, 5436 participants, high-quality evidence) or in independence (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.03; 5 studies, 5926 participants; high-quality evidence) at the end of treatment. In the studies at low risk of bias across all domains, SSRIs slightly reduced the average depression score (SMD 0.14 lower, 95% CI 0.19 lower to 0.08 lower; 4 studies; 5356 participants, high-quality evidence) and there was a slight reduction in the proportion with depression (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.86; 3 studies, 5907 participants, high-quality evidence). Cognition was slightly better in the control group (MD -1.22, 95% CI -2.37 to -0.07; 4 studies, 5373 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Only one study (n = 30) reported neurological deficit score (SMD -0.39, 95% CI -1.12 to 0.33; low-quality evidence). SSRIs resulted in little to no difference in motor deficit (SMD 0.03, -0.02 to 0.08; 6 studies, 5518 participants, moderate-quality evidence). SSRIs slightly increased the proportion leaving the study early (RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.40; 6 studies, 6090 participants, high-quality evidence). SSRIs slightly increased the outcome of a seizure (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.98; 6 studies, 6080 participants, moderate-quality evidence) and a bone fracture (RR 2.35, 95% CI 1.62 to 3.41; 6 studies, 6080 participants, high-quality evidence). One study at low risk of bias across all domains reported gastrointestinal side effects (RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.33, to 8.83; 1 study, 30 participants). There was no difference in the total number of deaths between SSRI and placebo (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.24; 6 studies, 6090 participants, moderate quality evidence). SSRIs probably result in little to no difference in fatigue (MD -0.06; 95% CI -1.24 to 1.11; 4 studies, 5524 participants, moderate-quality of evidence), nor in quality of life (MD 0.00; 95% CI -0.02 to 0.02, 3 studies, 5482 participants, high-quality evidence). When all studies, irrespective of risk of bias, were included, SSRIs reduced disability scores but not the proportion independent. There was insufficient data to perform a meta-analysis of outcomes at end of follow-up. Several small ongoing studies are unlikely to alter conclusions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is high-quality evidence that SSRIs do not make a difference to disability or independence after stroke compared to placebo or usual care, reduced the risk of future depression, increased bone fractures and probably increased seizure risk.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for stroke recovery.

BACKGROUND: Stroke is a major cause of adult disability. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) have been used for many years to manage depression and other mood disorders after stroke. The 2012 Cochrane Review of SSRIs for stroke recovery demonstrated positive effects on recovery, even in people who were not depressed at randomisation. A large trial of fluoxetine for stroke recovery (fluoxetine versus placebo under supervision) has recently been published, and it is now appropriate to update the evidence. OBJECTIVES: To determine if SSRIs are more effective than placebo or usual care at improving outcomes in people less than 12 months post-stroke, and to determine whether treatment with SSRIs is associated with adverse effects. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 16 July 2018), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL, Issue 7 of 12, July 2018), MEDLINE (1946 to July 2018), Embase (1974 to July 2018), CINAHL (1982 July 2018), PsycINFO (1985 to July 2018), AMED (1985 to July 2018), and PsycBITE March 2012 to July 2018). We also searched grey literature and clinical trials registers. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke survivors at any time within the first year. The intervention was any SSRI, given at any dose, for any period, and for any indication. We excluded drugs with mixed pharmacological effects. The comparator was usual care or placebo. To be included, trials had to collect data on at least one of our primary (disability score or independence) or secondary outcomes (impairments, depression, anxiety, quality of life, fatigue, healthcare cost, death, adverse events and leaving the trial early). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data on demographics, type of stroke, time since stroke, our primary and secondary outcomes, and sources of bias. Two review authors independently extracted data from each trial. We used standardised mean differences (SMDs) to estimate treatment effects for continuous variables, and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous effects, with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed risks of bias and applied GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We identified a total of 63 eligible trials recruiting 9168 participants, most of which provided data only at end of treatment and not at follow-up. There was a wide age range. About half the trials required participants to have depression to enter the trial. The duration, drug, and dose varied between trials. Only three of the included trials were at low risk of bias across the key 'Risk of bias' domains. A meta-analysis of these three trials found little or no effect of SSRI on either disability score: SMD -0.01 (95% CI -0.09 to 0.06; P = 0.75; 2 studies, 2829 participants; moderate-quality evidence) or independence: RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.09; P = 0.99; 3 studies, 3249 participants; moderate-quality evidence). We downgraded both these outcomes for imprecision. SSRIs reduced the average depression score (SMD 0.11 lower, 0.19 lower to 0.04 lower; 2 trials, 2861 participants; moderate-quality evidence), but there was a higher observed number of gastrointestinal side effects among participants treated with SSRIs compared to placebo (RR 2.19, 95% CI 1.00 to 4.76; P = 0.05; 2 studies, 148 participants; moderate-quality evidence), with no evidence of heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). For seizures there was no evidence of a substantial difference. When we included all trials in a sensitivity analysis, irrespective of risk of bias, SSRIs appeared to reduce disability scores but not dependence. One large trial (FOCUS) dominated the results. We identified several ongoing trials, including two large trials that together will recruit more than 3000 participants. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no reliable evidence that SSRIs should be used routinely to promote recovery after stroke. Meta-analysis of the trials at low risk of bias indicate that SSRIs do not improve recovery from stroke. We identified potential improvements in disability only in the analyses which included trials at high risk of bias. A further meta-analysis of large ongoing trials will be required to determine the generalisability of these findings.

Dual diagnosis of epilepsy and psychogenic nonepileptic seizures: Systematic review and meta-analysis of frequency, correlates, and outcomes.

Comorbid epilepsy and psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES) represent a serious challenge for the clinicians. However, the frequency, associations, and outcomes of dual diagnosis of epilepsy and PNES are unclear. The aim of the review was to determine the frequency, correlates, and outcomes of a dual diagnosis. A systematic review of all published observational studies (from inception to Dec. 2016) was conducted to determine the frequency, correlates, and outcomes of dual diagnosis. We included studies of individuals of any age reporting a dual diagnosis of epilepsy and PNES. All observational study designs were included with the exception of case reports and case series with fewer than 10 participants. The mean frequency of epilepsy in patients with PNES across all studies was 22% (95% confidence intervals [CI] 20 to 25%, range: 0% to 90%) while the mean frequency of PNES in patients with epilepsy was 12% (95% CI 10 to 14%, range: 1% to 62%). High heterogeneity means that these pooled estimates should be viewed with caution. A number of correlates of dual diagnosis were reported. Some studies delineated differences in semiology of seizures in patients with dual diagnosis vs. PNES or epilepsy only. However, most of the correlates were inconclusive. Only a few studies examined outcome in patients with dual diagnosis. Dual diagnosis is common in clinical practice, especially among patients referred to specialized services, and requires careful diagnosis and management.

Neuroticism and Fatigue 3 Months After Ischemic Stroke: A Cross-Sectional Study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relation between neuroticism and fatigue in Chinese patients with stroke. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Acute stroke unit. PARTICIPANTS: Survivors of ischemic stroke (N=191) recruited from the acute stroke unit between May 1, 2010, and September 1, 2011. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The personality trait of neuroticism was measured with the neuroticism subscale of the Chinese version of the NEO Five-Factor Inventory. The level of fatigue was measured with the Fatigue Assessment Scale. The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, Geriatric Depression Scale, Barthel Index, and Mini-Mental State Examination were administered to obtain demographic and clinical information. RESULTS: Fatigue severity 3 months after stroke positively correlated with Geriatric Depression Scale and NEO Five-Factor Inventory neuroticism scores and negatively correlated with the Barthel Index score. CONCLUSIONS: Neuroticism, independent of depressive symptoms, is a predictor of fatigue severity 3 months after stroke. Interventions such as psychological screening programs are warranted for early detection of patients at high risk of poststroke depression.

Interventions for post-stroke fatigue.

BACKGROUND: Post-stroke fatigue (PSF) is a common and distressing problem after stroke. The best ways to prevent or treat PSF are uncertain. Several different interventions can be argued to have a rational basis. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether, among people with stroke, any intervention reduces the proportion of people with fatigue, fatigue severity, or both; and to determine the effect of intervention on health-related quality of life, disability, dependency and death, and whether such intervention is cost effective. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched May 2014), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, 2014, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1950 to May 2014), EMBASE (1980 to May 2014), CINAHL (1982 to May 2014), AMED (1985 to May 2014), PsycINFO (1967 to May 2014), Digital Dissertations (1861 to May 2014), British Nursing Index (1985 to May 2014), PEDro (searched May 2014) and PsycBITE (searched May 2014). We also searched four ongoing trials registries, scanned reference lists, performed citation tracking of included trials and contacted experts. SELECTION CRITERIA: Two review authors independently scrutinised all titles and abstracts and excluded obviously irrelevant studies. We obtained the full texts for potentially relevant studies and three review authors independently applied the inclusion criteria. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared an intervention with a control, or compared different interventions for PSF. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias for each included trial. The primary outcomes were severity of fatigue, or proportion of people with fatigue after treatment. We performed separate analyses for trials investigating efficacy in treating PSF, trials investigating efficacy in preventing PSF and trials not primarily investigating efficacy in PSF but which reported fatigue as an outcome. We pooled results from trials that had a control arm. For trials that compared different potentially active interventions without a control arm, we performed analyses for individual trials without pooling.We calculated standardised mean difference (SMD) as the effect size for continuous outcomes and risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes. We pooled the results using a random-effects model and assessed heterogeneity using the I(2) statistic. We performed separate subgroup analyses for pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. We also performed sensitivity analyses to assess the influence of methodological quality. MAIN RESULTS: We retrieved 12,490 citations, obtained full texts for 58 studies and included 12 trials (three from the 2008 search and nine from the 2014 search) with 703 participants. Eight trials primarily investigated the efficacy in treating PSF, of which six trials with seven comparisons provided data suitable for meta-analysis (five pharmacological interventions: fluoxetine, enerion, (-)-OSU6162, citicoline and a combination of Chinese herbs; and two non-pharmacological interventions: a fatigue education programme and a mindfulness-based stress reduction programme). The fatigue severity was lower in the intervention groups than in the control groups (244 participants, pooled SMD -1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.93 to -0.21), with significant heterogeneity between trials (I(2) = 87%, degrees of freedom (df) = 6, P value < 0.00001). The beneficial effect was not seen in trials that had used adequate allocation concealment (two trials, 89 participants, SMD -0.38, 95% CI -0.80 to 0.04) or trials that had used adequate blinding of outcome assessors (four trials, 198 participants, SMD -1.10, 95% CI -2.31 to 0.11).No trial primarily investigated the efficacy in preventing PSF.Four trials (248 participants) did not primarily investigate the efficacy on fatigue but other symptoms after stroke. None of these interventions showed any benefit on reducing PSF, which included tirilazad mesylate, continuous positive airway pressure for sleep apnoea, antidepressants and a self management programme for recovery from chronic diseases. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was insufficient evidence on the efficacy of any intervention to treat or prevent fatigue after stroke. Trials to date have been small and heterogeneous, and some have had a high risk of bias. Some of the interventions described were feasible in people with stroke, but their efficacy should be investigated in RCTs with a more robust study design and adequate sample sizes.

Psychometric properties of the Russian version of the Edinburgh cognitive and behavioral amyotrophic lateral sclerosis screen.

BACKGROUND: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a neurodegenerative condition with observable cognitive and behavioral impairment. The Edinburgh Cognitive and Behavioral ALS Screen (ECAS) is a tool developed specifically for people with ALS (pwALS) and previously translated into Russian, but the psychometric properties have not yet been explored. The aim was to explore and determine the psychometric properties of the Russian-version of ECAS (ECAS-R). METHODS: 56 Russian speaking pwALS, 32 of their caregivers and 26 healthy controls were recruited for the study. They completed the ECAS-R, Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). King Staging System was also utilized. Internal consistency, divergent and convergent validity, as well as culturally-derived cutoff scores of ECAS-R were determined. RESULTS: The internal consistency of ECAS-R was good (Cronbach's alpha = 0.73). Convergent validity was observed though a strong correlation between the ECAS-R and MoCA scores. No correlation between ECAS-R and PHQ-9 were observed in terms of divergent validity. Based on culturally-derived cutoff scores, 64.2% (N = 36) of pwALS displayed cognitive impairment, with the most affected cognitive domains as executive function and language. Apathy was the most common behavioral impairment for pwALS followed by a loss of sympathy/empathy. CONCLUSIONS: The ECAS-R is valid and reliable tool for the screening for the cognitive and behavioral impairment in Russian-speaking pwALS, with culturally-derived cutoffs presented.

Mechanisms of Post-Stroke Fatigue: A Follow-Up From the Third Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable.

BACKGROUND: Post-stroke fatigue (PSF) is a significant and highly prevalent symptom, whose mechanisms are poorly understood. The third Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable paper on PSF focussed primarily on defining and measuring PSF while mechanisms were briefly discussed. This companion paper to the main paper is aimed at elaborating possible mechanisms of PSF. METHODS: This paper reviews the available evidence that potentially explains the pathophysiology of PSF and draws parallels from fatigue literature in other conditions. We start by proposing a case for phenotyping PSF based on structural, functional, and behavioral characteristics of PSF. This is followed by discussion of a potentially significant role of early inflammation in the development of fatigue, specifically the impact of low-grade inflammation and its long-term systemic effects resulting in PSF. Of the many neurotransmitter systems in the brain, the dopaminergic systems have the most evidence for a role in PSF, along with a role in sensorimotor processing. Sensorimotor neural network dynamics are compromised as highlighted by evidence from both neurostimulation and neuromodulation studies. The double-edged sword effect of exercise on PSF provides further insight into how PSF might emerge and the importance of carefully titrating interventional paradigms. CONCLUSION: The paper concludes by synthesizing the presented evidence into a unifying model of fatigue which distinguishes between factors that pre-dispose, precipitate, and perpetuate PSF. This framework will help guide new research into the biological mechanisms of PSF which is a necessary prerequisite for developing treatments to mitigate the debilitating effects of post-stroke fatigue.

A roadmap for research in post-stroke fatigue: Consensus-based core recommendations from the third Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable.

RATIONALE: Fatigue affects almost half of all people living with stroke. Stroke survivors rank understanding fatigue and how to reduce it as one of the highest research priorities. METHODS: We convened an interdisciplinary, international group of clinical and pre-clinical researchers and lived experience experts. We identified four priority areas: (1) best measurement tools for research, (2) clinical identification of fatigue and potentially modifiable causes, (3) promising interventions and recommendations for future trials, and (4) possible biological mechanisms of fatigue. Cross-cutting themes were aphasia and the voice of people with lived experience. Working parties were formed and structured consensus building processes were followed. RESULTS: We present 20 recommendations covering outcome measures for research, development, and testing of new interventions and priority areas for future research on the biology of post-stroke fatigue. We developed and recommend the use of the Stroke Fatigue Clinical Assessment Tool. CONCLUSIONS: By synthesizing current knowledge in post-stroke fatigue across clinical and pre-clinical fields, our work provides a roadmap for future research into post-stroke fatigue.

A roadmap for research in post-stroke fatigue: Consensus-based core recommendations from the third Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable.

RATIONALE: Fatigue affects almost half of all people living with stroke. Stroke survivors rank understanding fatigue and how to reduce it as one of the highest research priorities. METHODS: We convened an interdisciplinary, international group of clinical and pre-clinical researchers and lived experience experts. We identified four priority areas: (1) best measurement tools for research, (2) clinical identification of fatigue and potentially modifiable causes, (3) promising interventions and recommendations for future trials, and (4) possible biological mechanisms of fatigue. Cross-cutting themes were aphasia and the voice of people with lived experience. Working parties were formed and structured consensus building processes were followed. RESULTS: We present 20 recommendations covering outcome measures for research, development, and testing of new interventions and priority areas for future research on the biology of post-stroke fatigue. We developed and recommend the use of the Stroke Fatigue Clinical Assessment Tool. CONCLUSIONS: By synthesizing current knowledge in post-stroke fatigue across clinical and pre-clinical fields, our work provides a roadmap for future research into post-stroke fatigue.

Apathy in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: systematic review and meta-analysis of frequency, correlates, and outcomes.

Objectives: To determine the frequency and correlates of apathy in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and its influence on the prognosis of the disease.Methods: Three databases were searched: MEDLINE, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Quantitative synthesis of the frequency of apathy in ALS was conducted using random effects in Stata (College Station, TX). Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were conducted to investigate the association between frequency of apathy in ALS and different covariates.Results: Fifty-two studies (51 cohorts) were included in the analysis. The pooled frequency of apathy in ALS was 25% (95% confidence interval (CI) 14-35%) according to the studies that used self-rated tools and 34% (95% CI 27-41%) according to studies that used informant-rated tools. The emergence of apathy was associated with cognitive decline and bulbar onset of the disease. There was no consistent relationship between apathy and disease stage or the severity of depression. Structural brain imaging studies established that ALS patients with apathy exhibited more prominent changes with structural and functional brain imaging particularly involving fronto-subcortical regions of the brain. Overall, apathy worsened the long-term prognosis of ALS.Discussion: Apathy affects up to a third of ALS patients аnd develops in the context of progressive neurodegeneration. Increased awareness and understanding of non-motor symptoms in ALS highlights the potential utility of apathy as an outcome measure in future clinical trial design.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for stroke recovery.

BACKGROUND: Stroke is the major cause of adult disability. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) have been used for many years to manage depression. Recently, small trials have demonstrated that SSRIs might improve recovery after stroke, even in people who are not depressed. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are the least biased way to bring together data from several trials. Given the promising effect of SSRIs on stroke recovery seen in small trials, a systematic review and meta-analysis is needed. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether SSRIs improve recovery after stroke, and whether treatment with SSRIs was associated with adverse effects. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (August 2011), Cochrane Depression Anxiety and Neurosis Group Trials Register (November 2011), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 8), MEDLINE (from 1948 to August 2011), EMBASE (from 1980 to August 2011), CINAHL (from 1982 to August 2011), AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine) (from 1985 to August 2011), PsycINFO (from 1967 to August 2011) and PsycBITE (Pyschological Database for Brain Impairment Treatment Efficacy) (March 2012). To identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials we searched trials registers, pharmaceutical websites, reference lists, contacted experts and performed citation tracking of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that recruited stroke survivors (ischaemic or haemorrhagic) at any time within the first year. The intervention was any SSRI, given at any dose, for any period. We excluded drugs with mixed pharmacological effects. The comparator was usual care or placebo. In order to be included, trials had to collect data on at least one of our primary (dependence and disability) or secondary (impairments, depression, anxiety, quality of life, fatigue, healthcare cost, death, adverse events and leaving the trial early) outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data on demographics, type of stroke, time since stroke, our primary and secondary outcomes, and sources of bias. For trials in English, two review authors independently extracted data. For Chinese papers, one review author extracted data. We used standardised mean differences (SMD) to estimate treatment effects for continuous variables, and risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous effects, with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). MAIN RESULTS: We identified 56 completed trials of SSRI versus control, of which 52 trials (4059 participants) provided data for meta-analysis. There were statistically significant benefits of SSRI on both of the primary outcomes: RR for reducing dependency at the end of treatment was 0.81 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.97) based on one trial, and for disability score, the SMD was 0.91 (95% CI 0.60 to 1.22) (22 trials involving 1343 participants) with high heterogeneity between trials (I(2) = 87%; P < 0.0001). For neurological deficit, depression and anxiety, there were statistically significant benefits of SSRIs. For neurological deficit score, the SMD was -1.00 (95% CI -1.26 to -0.75) (29 trials involving 2011 participants) with high heterogeneity between trials (I(2) = 86%; P < 0.00001). For dichotomous depression scores, the RR was 0.43 (95% CI 0.24 to 0.77) (eight trials involving 771 participants) with high heterogeneity between trials (I(2) = 77%; P < 0.0001). For continuous depression scores, the SMD was -1.91 (95% CI -2.34 to -1.48) (39 trials involving 2728 participants) with high heterogeneity between trials (I(2) = 95%; P < 0.00001). For anxiety, the SMD was -0.77 (95% CI -1.52 to -0.02) (eight trials involving 413 participants) with high heterogeneity between trials (I(2) = 92%; P < 0.00001). There was no statistically significant benefit of SSRI on cognition, death, motor deficits and leaving the trial early. For cognition, the SMD was 0.32 (95% CI -0.23 to 0.86), (seven trials involving 425 participants) with high heterogeneity between trials (I(2) = 86%; P < 0.00001). The RR for death was 0.76 (95% CI 0.34 to 1.70) (46 trials involving 3344 participants) with no heterogeneity between trials (I(2) = 0%; P = 0.85). For motor deficits, the SMD was -0.33 (95% CI -1.22 to 0.56) (two trials involving 145 participants). The RR for leaving the trial early was 1.02 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.21) in favour of control, with no heterogeneity between trials. There was a non-significant excess of seizures (RR 2.67; 95% CI 0.61 to 11.63) (seven trials involving 444 participants), a non-significant excess of gastrointestinal side effects (RR 1.90; 95% CI 0.94 to 3.85) (14 trials involving 902 participants) and a non-significant excess of bleeding (RR 1.63; 95% CI 0.20 to 13.05) (two trials involving 249 participants) in those allocated SSRIs. Data were not available on quality of life, fatigue or healthcare costs.There was no clear evidence from subgroup analyses that one SSRI was consistently superior to another, or that time since stroke or depression at baseline had a major influence on effect sizes. Sensitivity analyses suggested that effect sizes were smaller when we excluded trials at high or unclear risk of bias.Only eight trials provided data on outcomes after treatment had been completed; the effect sizes were generally in favour of SSRIs but CIs were wide. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: SSRIs appeared to improve dependence, disability, neurological impairment, anxiety and depression after stroke, but there was heterogeneity between trials and methodological limitations in a substantial proportion of the trials. Large, well-designed trials are now needed to determine whether SSRIs should be given routinely to patients with stroke.

Vestibular drop attacks in Ménière's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of frequency, correlates and consequences.

BACKGROUND: Vestibular drop attacks (VDA), also called Tumarkin otolith crises as a complication of Ménière's disease (MD) were first described in 1936. Nevertheless, a clearer understanding of their prevalence and manifestations is needed. THE OBJECTIVE: of this review is to determine the frequency, correlates and consequences of VDA in MD. METHOD: Three databases were searched (i.e., MEDLINE, PubMed and Google Academia). A total of 1,791 references were identified, of which 18 studies were considered eligible. There was a large variation in the definition of VDA used in the studies. RESULTS: The frequency of VDA in MD leading to a fall to the ground varied from 3 to 19% in 9 hospital-based studies. In studies where a less restrictive definition of VDA included attacks with postural perturbation, tripping and near-to-fall situations was used the prevalence ranged from 50 to 72%. The pooled frequency of VDA leading to fall to the ground was 8% (95% CI 4 to 12%) in hospital-based studies. In these studies, VDA often occurred in severe and advanced MD whereas in cohort studies such connection was not found. Co-morbidity with migraine increased the likelihood of VDA occurrence in MD. In 3 studies syncope was recorded in connection to VDA with falls. In terms of clinical manifestation, audiometry, MRI, vestibular evoked muscle response measures indicated endolymphatic hydrops with involvement of the otolith system. The hearing loss was more pronounced, and balance was worse in MD patients with VDA than in those without. Injury associated with VDA was reported in only one study. CONCLUSIONS: VDA is a common phenomenon in MD, occurring even in mild MD and complicated with syncope. Some preliminary evidence suggests that VDA may lead to severe injuries.

Physicians' beliefs about brain surgery for drug-resistant epilepsy: A global survey.

PURPOSE: To investigate the opinions of physicians about brain surgery for drug-resistant epilepsy worldwide. METHODS: Practicing neurologists, psychiatrists, and neurosurgeons from around the world were invited to participate in an online survey. The survey anonymously collected data about demographics, years in clinical practice, discipline, nation, work setting, and answers to the questions about beliefs and attitudes about brain surgery for drug-resistant epilepsy. RESULTS: In total, 1410 physicians from 20 countries and different world regions participated. The propensity to discuss brain surgery with patients, who have drug-resistant seizures, was higher among men (versus women) [Odds Ratio (OR) 1.67, 95% CI 1.20-2.31; p = 0.002]. In comparison to neurologists, psychiatrists were less likely (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.17-0.47; p < 0.001) and neurosurgeons were more likely (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.08-3.72; p = 0.028) to discuss about it. Survey participants working in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and the Former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics showed a lower propensity to discuss epilepsy surgery with patients. CONCLUSION: This study showed that on an international level, there is still a knowledge gap concerning epilepsy surgery and much needs to be done to identify and overcome barriers to epilepsy surgery for patients with drug-resistant seizures worldwide.

Benign paroxysmal positional vertigo in Meniere's disease: systematic review and meta-analysis of frequency and clinical characteristics.

There is a recognized association of Meniere's disease (MD) and benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV). However, the frequency and clinical characteristics of BPPV in MD are unclear. The aim of this review was to determine the mean frequency and clinical features of BPPV in MD. Three databases were searched: MEDLINE, PubMed and Google Academia. Studies reporting the frequency of BPPV in MD were pooled. A total of 4198 references were identified, of which 20 studies were considered eligible. The pooled frequency of BPPV in MD was 14% (95% CI 9-18%). It was 38% (95% CI 26-49%) in longitudinal studies and 8% (95% CI 6-11%) in cross-sectional ones. BPPV comorbid with MD was mostly observed in the ear affected by hydrops, in females, in patients with more advanced disease. Canalolithiasis of the horizontal semicircular canal was more common in patients with BPPV associated with MD than in idiopathic BPPV. BPPV in MD was more prone to recurrence and required more canal repositioning maneuvers.