PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16499772

Defining intractability: comparisons among published definitions.

Abstract

PURPOSE: Intractable epilepsy is the focus of much research; however, this concept is defined in no single way. Individual studies use different definitions, creating difficulties for comparisons of results across studies. A head-to-head comparison of definitions could highlight these differences and motivate the development of consensus guidelines. METHODS: Within a single prospective study of 613 children in Connecticut with newly diagnosed epilepsy (1993-1997), six different published definitions or indicators for intractability were applied and compared. All definitions were assessed at various times within the first 5 years after diagnosis, with the exact timing reflecting how they were used in their initial reports. Observed and chance-adjusted agreement (kappa) were computed. The associations of each definition with remission status 7-10 years after diagnosis were quantified with a relative risk. RESULTS: Depending on the specific definition, the epilepsy of 9-24% of children was considered intractable. Observed agreements among the definitions ranged from a low of 0.83 to a high of 0.96. Kappas ranged from low of 0.45 to 0.79. More similar definitions had higher levels of agreement. All definitions were strongly associated with remission status as of last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Agreement among the different definitions is strong but imperfect. All definitions were significantly associated with longer-term outcome. No single preferred definition of intractable epilepsy exists. Some discussion within the field of epilepsy and a consensus process should be considered as a future step for enhancing comparability of research efforts and clinical guidelines. Consideration should be given to whether a single definition will suit all purposes or whether different types of definitions are needed for different purposes.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Anne T Berg, Molly M Kelly. 2006. Defining intractability: comparisons among published definitions.. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-1167.2006.00440.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

A double-blind placebo-controlled trial of zonisamide (zonegran) in the treatment of essential tremor.

Medical therapy for essential tremor (ET), a common movement disorder, is often inadequate. We performed a double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of zonisamide (ZNS), an antiepileptic agent, in treating ET. Twenty patients (mean age, 60 +/- 15 years) with ET were randomized to receive ZNS or placebo. ZNS was initiated at a dosage of 100 mg/day and escalated to 200 mg/day at day 14. Patients were evaluated by accelerometry and the Fahn-Tolosa-Marin (FTM) rating scale at baseline and days 14 and 28, as well as the Clinical Global Impression (CGI-C) scale at day 28. At endpoint, subjects assigned to ZNS were taking a mean dosage of 160 +/- 50 mg/day. There were no significant improvements in the FTM total score or its subsections. Tremor amplitude as assessed by accelerometry significantly improved in the ZNS group compared to the placebo group at endpoint relative to baseline (-0.50 +/- 0.72 vs. 0.30 +/- 0.79 m/s(2); P = 0.03). On the CGI-C, 60% (n = 6) of patients in the ZNS group felt that their tremor was unchanged, while the remaining patients felt that their tremor was "minimally improved." Thirty percent (n = 3) of patients taking ZNS discontinued the study due to side effects (fatigue, headache, paresthesias) while taking 100 mg per day. ZNS did not provide significant improvements in clinical rating scales at study endpoint compared to placebo and was only modestly well tolerated. ZNS was effective in reducing tremor amplitude as measured by accelerometry.

Anticonvulsants↗