Browsing by Author "Sinha, Saurabh R"
Now showing 1 - 9 of 9
- Results Per Page
- Sort Options
Item Open Access Automatic Vagus Nerve Stimulation Triggered by Ictal Tachycardia: Clinical Outcomes and Device Performance--The U.S. E-37 Trial.(Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society, 2016-02) Fisher, Robert S; Afra, Pegah; Macken, Micheal; Minecan, Daniela N; Bagić, Anto; Benbadis, Selim R; Helmers, Sandra L; Sinha, Saurabh R; Slater, Jeremy; Treiman, David; Begnaud, Jason; Raman, Pradheep; Najimipour, BitaThe Automatic Stimulation Mode (AutoStim) feature of the Model 106 Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS) Therapy System stimulates the left vagus nerve on detecting tachycardia. This study evaluates performance, safety of the AutoStim feature during a 3-5-day Epilepsy Monitoring Unit (EMU) stay and long- term clinical outcomes of the device stimulating in all modes.The E-37 protocol (NCT01846741) was a prospective, unblinded, U.S. multisite study of the AspireSR(®) in subjects with drug-resistant partial onset seizures and history of ictal tachycardia. VNS Normal and Magnet Modes stimulation were present at all times except during the EMU stay. Outpatient visits at 3, 6, and 12 months tracked seizure frequency, severity, quality of life, and adverse events.Twenty implanted subjects (ages 21-69) experienced 89 seizures in the EMU. 28/38 (73.7%) of complex partial and secondarily generalized seizures exhibited ≥20% increase in heart rate change. 31/89 (34.8%) of seizures were treated by Automatic Stimulation on detection; 19/31 (61.3%) seizures ended during the stimulation with a median time from stimulation onset to seizure end of 35 sec. Mean duty cycle at six-months increased from 11% to 16%. At 12 months, quality of life and seizure severity scores improved, and responder rate was 50%. Common adverse events were dysphonia (n = 7), convulsion (n = 6), and oropharyngeal pain (n = 3).The Model 106 performed as intended in the study population, was well tolerated and associated with clinical improvement from baseline. The study design did not allow determination of which factors were responsible for improvements.Item Open Access Barriers and facilitators to implementation of epilepsy self-management programs: a systematic review using qualitative evidence synthesis methods.(Systematic reviews, 2020-04-25) Lewinski, Allison A; Shapiro, Abigail; Gierisch, Jennifer M; Goldstein, Karen M; Blalock, Dan V; Luedke, Matthew W; Gordon, Adelaide M; Bosworth, Hayden B; Drake, Connor; Lewis, Jeffrey D; Sinha, Saurabh R; Husain, Aatif M; Tran, Tung T; Van Noord, Megan G; Williams, John WBackground
Epilepsy affects nearly 50 million people worldwide. Self-management is critical for individuals with epilepsy in order to maintain optimal physical, cognitive, and emotional health. Implementing and adopting a self-management program requires considering many factors at the person, program, and systems levels. We conducted a systematic review of qualitative and mixed-methods studies to identify facilitators and barriers that impact implementation and adoption of self-management programs for adults with epilepsy.Methods
We used established systematic review methodologies for qualitative and mixed-methods studies. We included studies addressing facilitators (i.e., factors that aided) or barriers (i.e., factors that impeded) to implementation and adoption of self-management interventions for adults with epilepsy. We conducted a narrative thematic synthesis to identify facilitators and barriers.Results
The literature search identified 2700 citations; 13 studies met eligibility criteria. Our synthesis identified five themes that categorize facilitators and barriers to successful implementation epilepsy self-management: (1) relevance, intervention content that facilitates acquisition of self-management skills; (2) personalization, intervention components that account for the individual's social, physical, and environmental characteristics; (3) intervention components, components and dosing of the intervention; (4) technology considerations, considerations that account for individual's use, familiarity with, and ownership of technology; and (5) clinician interventionist, role and preparation of the individual who leads intervention. We identified facilitators in 11 of the 13 studies and barriers in 11 of the 13 studies and classified these by social-ecological level (i.e., patient/caregiver, program, site/system).Conclusion
Identification of facilitators and barriers at multiple levels provides insight into disease-specific factors that influence implementation and adoption of self-management programs for individuals with epilepsy. Our findings indicate that involving individuals with epilepsy and their caregivers in intervention development, and then tailoring intervention content during the intervention, can help ensure the content is relevant to intervention participants. Our findings also indicate the role of the clinician (i.e., the individual who provides self-management education) is important to intervention implementation, and key issues with clinicians were identified as barriers and opportunities for improvement. Overall, our findings have practical value for those seeking to implement and adopt self-management interventions for epilepsy and other chronic illnesses.Systematic review registration
PROSPERO registration number is CRD42018098604.Item Open Access Baseline EEG pattern on continuous ICU EEG monitoring and incidence of seizures(Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2015-01-01) Swisher, Christa B; Shah, Dharmen; Sinha, Saurabh R; Husain, Aatif M© 2015 by the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society..Purpose: To identify the probability of detecting nonconvulsive seizures based on the initial pattern seen in the first 30 minutes of continuous EEG (cEEG) monitoring. Methods: Continuous EEG monitoring reports from 243 adult patients were reviewed, assessing the baseline cEEG monitoring pattern and the presence of seizures during the entire monitoring period. The baseline EEG patterns were classified into nine categories: seizures, lateralized periodic discharges, generalized periodic discharges, focal epileptiform discharges, burst suppression, asymmetric background, generalized slowing, generalized periodic discharges with triphasic morphology, and normal. Results: Overall, 51 patients (21%) had nonconvulsive seizures at any time during cEEG monitoring. Notably, 112 patients had generalized slowing as the initial EEG pattern, and none of these patients were noted to have seizures. Seizure rates among the types of baseline EEG findings were as follows: lateralized periodic discharges (56%, n = 9), burst suppression (50%, n = 10), generalized periodic discharges (50%, n = 2), normal (33%, n = 3), focal epileptiform discharges (31%, n = 35), and asymmetric background (11%, n = 46). Conclusions: Patients with only generalized slowing seen on the baseline EEG recording are unlikely to develop seizures on subsequent cEEG monitoring. Depending on the clinical circumstance, the standard duration of cEEG recording (24-48 hours) may be unnecessary in patients with generalized slowing as their only cEEG abnormalityItem Open Access Diagnostic Accuracy of Electrographic Seizure Detection by Neurophysiologists and Non-Neurophysiologists in the Adult ICU Using a Panel of Quantitative EEG Trends.(J Clin Neurophysiol, 2015-08) Swisher, Christa B; White, Corey R; Mace, Brian E; Dombrowski, Keith E; Husain, Aatif M; Kolls, Bradley J; Radtke, Rodney R; Tran, Tung T; Sinha, Saurabh RPURPOSE: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of a panel of quantitative EEG (qEEG) trends for seizure detection in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients when reviewed by neurophysiologists and non-neurophysiologists. METHODS: One hour qEEG panels (n = 180) were collected retrospectively from 45 ICU patients and were distributed to 5 neurophysiologists, 7 EEG technologists, and 5 Neuroscience ICU nurses for evaluation of seizures. Each panel consisted of the following qEEG tools, displayed separately for left and right hemisphere electrodes: rhythmicity spectrogram (rhythmic run detection and display; Persyst Inc), color density spectral array, EEG asymmetry index, and amplitude integrated EEG. The reviewers did not have access to the raw EEG data. RESULTS: For the reviewer's ability to detect the presence of seizures on qEEG panels when compared with the gold standard of independent raw EEG review, the sensitivities and specificities are as follows: neurophysiologists 0.87 and 0.61, EEG technologists 0.80 and 0.80, and Neuroscience ICU nurses 0.87 and 0.61, respectively. There was no statistical difference among the three groups regarding sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative EEG display panels are a promising tool to aid detection of seizures by non-neurophysiologists as well as by neurophysiologists. However, even when used as a panel, qEEG trends do not appear to be adequate as the sole method for reviewing continuous EEG data.Item Open Access Intraoperative microseizure detection using a high-density micro-electrocorticography electrode array.(Brain communications, 2022-01) Sun, James; Barth, Katrina; Qiao, Shaoyu; Chiang, Chia-Han; Wang, Charles; Rahimpour, Shervin; Trumpis, Michael; Duraivel, Suseendrakumar; Dubey, Agrita; Wingel, Katie E; Rachinskiy, Iakov; Voinas, Alex E; Ferrentino, Breonna; Southwell, Derek G; Haglund, Michael M; Friedman, Allan H; Lad, Shivanand P; Doyle, Werner K; Solzbacher, Florian; Cogan, Gregory; Sinha, Saurabh R; Devore, Sasha; Devinsky, Orrin; Friedman, Daniel; Pesaran, Bijan; Viventi, JonathanOne-third of epilepsy patients suffer from medication-resistant seizures. While surgery to remove epileptogenic tissue helps some patients, 30-70% of patients continue to experience seizures following resection. Surgical outcomes may be improved with more accurate localization of epileptogenic tissue. We have previously developed novel thin-film, subdural electrode arrays with hundreds of microelectrodes over a 100-1000 mm2 area to enable high-resolution mapping of neural activity. Here, we used these high-density arrays to study microscale properties of human epileptiform activity. We performed intraoperative micro-electrocorticographic recordings in nine patients with epilepsy. In addition, we recorded from four patients with movement disorders undergoing deep brain stimulator implantation as non-epileptic controls. A board-certified epileptologist identified microseizures, which resembled electrographic seizures normally observed with clinical macroelectrodes. Recordings in epileptic patients had a significantly higher microseizure rate (2.01 events/min) than recordings in non-epileptic subjects (0.01 events/min; permutation test, P = 0.0068). Using spatial averaging to simulate recordings from larger electrode contacts, we found that the number of detected microseizures decreased rapidly with increasing contact diameter and decreasing contact density. In cases in which microseizures were spatially distributed across multiple channels, the approximate onset region was identified. Our results suggest that micro-electrocorticographic electrode arrays with a high density of contacts and large coverage are essential for capturing microseizures in epilepsy patients and may be beneficial for localizing epileptogenic tissue to plan surgery or target brain stimulation.Item Open Access Letter to the Editor: Electroencephalography at the time of COVID-19 pandemic in Italy.(Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2020-10-23) Selioutski, Olga; Sinha, Saurabh R; Tatum, William; Park, JunItem Open Access Self-management of Epilepsy: A Systematic Review.(Annals of internal medicine, 2019-07) Luedke, Matthew W; Blalock, Dan V; Goldstein, Karen M; Kosinski, Andrzej S; Sinha, Saurabh R; Drake, Connor; Lewis, Jeffrey D; Husain, Aatif M; Lewinski, Allison A; Shapiro, Abigail; Gierisch, Jennifer M; Tran, Tung T; Gordon, Adelaide M; Van Noord, Megan G; Bosworth, Hayden B; Williams, John WBackground:Although self-management is recommended for persons with epilepsy, its optimal strategies and effects are uncertain. Purpose:To evaluate the components and efficacy of self-management interventions in the treatment of epilepsy in community-dwelling persons. Data Sources:English-language searches of MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, and CINAHL in April 2018; the MEDLINE search was updated in March 2019. Study Selection:Randomized and nonrandomized comparative studies of self-management interventions for adults with epilepsy. Data Extraction:An investigator assessed study characteristics; intervention details, including 6 components of self-management; and outcomes, which were verified by a second reviewer. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed independently by 2 investigators. Data Synthesis:13 randomized and 2 nonrandomized studies (2514 patients) evaluated self-management interventions. Interventions were delivered primarily in group settings, used a median of 4 components, and followed 2 general strategies: 1 based on education and the other on psychosocial therapy. Education-based approaches improved self-management behaviors (standardized mean difference, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.0 to 1.04]), and psychosocial therapy-based approaches improved quality of life (mean difference, 6.64 [CI, 2.51 to 10.77]). Overall, self-management interventions did not reduce seizure rates, but 1 educational intervention decreased a composite of seizures, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. Limitation:High ROB in most studies, incomplete intervention descriptions, and studies limited to English-language publications. Conclusion:There is limited evidence that self-management strategies modestly improve some patient outcomes that are important to persons with epilepsy. Overall, self-management research in epilepsy is limited by the range of interventions tested, the small number of studies using self-monitoring technology, and uncertainty about components and strategies associated with benefit. Primary Funding Source:U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. (PROSPERO: CRD42018098604).Item Open Access Survey of current practices among US epileptologists of antiepileptic drug withdrawal after epilepsy surgery.(Epilepsy Behav, 2013-02) Swisher, Christa B; Sinha, Saurabh RIn order to identify the current practices of antiepileptic drug (AED) withdrawal after epilepsy surgery, a survey was administered to 204 adult and pediatric epileptologists. The responses from 58 epileptologists revealed wide variations regarding the time course and extent of AED withdrawal after successful epilepsy surgery. For most of the epileptologists, the likelihood of the surgery being successful is an important factor in determining whether or not AEDs are tapered. Most of the respondents started to taper AEDs more rapidly than suggested by previous reports. The majority of the epileptologists were able to stop all AEDs completely in a substantial number of patients. The most important factors considered when deciding to taper AEDs were the presence of ongoing auras and the occurrence of postoperative seizures prior to seizure remission. In the absence of data from well-designed prospective trials, such survey results can inform practice and, hopefully, aid in the design of future trials.Item Open Access Utilization of Quantitative EEG Trends for Critical Care Continuous EEG Monitoring: A Survey of Neurophysiologists.(J Clin Neurophysiol, 2016-12) Swisher, Christa B; Sinha, Saurabh RPURPOSE: Quantitative EEG (QEEG) can be used to assist with review of large amounts of data generated by critical care continuous EEG monitoring. This study aimed to identify current practices regarding the use of QEEG in critical care continuous EEG monitoring of critical care patients. METHODS: An online survey was sent to 796 members of the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society (ACNS), instructing only neurophysiologists to participate. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 75 neurophysiologists that use QEEG in their practice. Survey respondents reported that neurophysiologists and neurophysiology fellows are most likely to serve as QEEG readers (97% and 52%, respectively). However, 21% of respondents reported nonneurophysiologists are also involved with QEEG interpretation. The majority of nonneurophysiologist QEEG data review is aimed to alert neurophysiologists to periods of concern, but 22% reported that nonneurophysiologists use QEEG to directly guide clinical care. Quantitative EEG was used most frequently for seizure detection (92%) and burst suppression monitoring (59%). A smaller number of respondents use QEEG for monitoring the depth of sedation (29%), ischemia detection (28%), vasospasm detection (28%) and prognosis after cardiac arrest (21%). About half of the respondents do not review every page of the raw critical care continuous EEG record when using QEEG. Respondents prefer a panel of QEEG trends displayed as hemispheric data, when applicable. There is substantial variability regarding QEEG trend preferences for seizure detection and ischemia detection. CONCLUSIONS: QEEG is being used by neurophysiologists and nonneurophysiologists for applications beyond seizure detection, but practice patterns vary widely. There is a need for standardization of QEEG methods and practices.