Regulating drivers with epilepsy in Maryland: Results of the application of a United States consensus guideline

Risk of Seizure Recurrence Due to Autoimmune Encephalitis With NMDAR, LGI1, CASPR2, and GABABR Antibodies: Implications for Return to Driving

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Patients with ongoing seizures are usually not allowed to drive. The prognosis for seizure freedom is favorable in patients with autoimmune encephalitis (AIE) with antibodies against NMDA receptor (NMDAR), leucine-rich glioma-inactivated 1 (LGI1), contactin-associated protein-like 2 (CASPR2), and the gamma-aminobutyric-acid B receptor (GABABR). We hypothesized that after a seizure-free period of 3 months, patients with AIE have a seizure recurrence risk of <20% during the subsequent 12 months. This would render them eligible for noncommercial driving according to driving regulations in several countries.

METHODS

This retrospective multicenter cohort study analyzed follow-up data from patients aged 15 years or older with seizures resulting from NMDAR-, LGI1-, CASPR2-, or GABABR-AIE, who had been seizure-free for ≥3 months. We used Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimates for the seizure recurrence risk at 12 months for each antibody group and tested for the effects of potential covariates with regression models.

RESULTS

We included 383 patients with NMDAR-, 440 with LGI1-, 114 with CASPR2-, and 44 with GABABR-AIE from 14 international centers. After being seizure-free for 3 months after an initial seizure period, we calculated the probability of remaining seizure-free for another 12 months (KM estimate) as 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85-0.92) for NMDAR, 0.84 (CI 0.80-0.88) for LGI1, 0.82 (CI 0.75-0.90) for CASPR2, and 0.76 (CI 0.62-0.93) for GABABR.

DISCUSSION

Taking a <20% recurrence risk within 12 months as sufficient, patients with NMDAR-AIE and LGI1-AIE could be considered eligible for noncommercial driving after having been seizure-free for 3 months.

Physicians' attitudes toward driving by persons with epilepsy in Korea: 2009 versus 2017 survey

PURPOSE

This study compared physicians' attitudes toward the fitness of persons with epilepsy to drive between 2009 and 2017 in Korea.

METHODS

A questionnaire focusing on physicians' opinions about driving issues for persons with epilepsy was developed from literature reviews. Korean physicians were then surveyed anonymously via the online questionnaire in 2009 and in 2017.

RESULTS

The numbers of valid respondents were 118 in 2009 and 160 in 2017. The majority of respondents were neurologists. The preferred criterion for eligibility to drive in both surveys was 2 years free from seizure (41.5% in 2009 and 45.6% in 2017). However, the minimum seizure-free criterion for driving eligibility declined between 2009 and 2017. The changes in attitudes toward driving were significant only among physicians who had more than 10 patients with epilepsy per week. However, the proportion of physicians who agreed with 6-month seizure freedom as a criterion for fitness to drive was lower in 2017 than in 2009.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the preference of a 2-year seizure-free period as a criterion for fitness to drive did not change between 2009 and 2017, the minimum criterion for the seizure-free period did decline, particularly among physicians who had more than 10 patients with epilepsy per week in their clinic. The data support sustained efforts to promote education regarding aspects of epilepsy related to driving.

Epilepsy: Workup and Management in Adults

When managing epilepsy, there is a temptation to focus care with respect to the last and the next seizure. However, epilepsy is a multifaceted chronic condition and should be treated as such. Epilepsy comes with many physical risks, psychological effects, and socioeconomic ramifications, demanding a long-term commitment from the treating physician. Patients with epilepsy, compared to other chronically ill patient populations, have a worse quality of life, family function, and less social support. The majority of patients are well controlled on antiseizure drugs. However, approximately one-third will continue to have seizures despite optimized medical management. The primary aim of this article is to explore the long-term management of chronic epilepsy, and to address some of the particular needs of patients with chronic epilepsy.

Timelined multimodal recording of EEG and driving performance using a driving simulator system during a focal impaired awareness seizure

An epileptic seizure during the course of driving can result in a serious car accident. However, basic data on how epileptic seizures actually affect driving performance is significantly lacking. To understand the relationship, it is crucial to conduct not only behavioral but also electroencephalogram (EEG) analysis during epileptic seizures. Therefore, we developed a mobile driving simulator which makes it possible to record driving-related parameters time-lined with video-EEG. We report a case in which behavioral and EEG changes were successfully recorded during ictal periods of focal impaired awareness seizure in a patient engaged with the system. With the current lack of objective data describing how seizures impair driving performance, such an accumulation of information could improve personalized medical management, influence legal adjudication and assist in the development of driving support systems for people with epilepsy.

•

A driving simulator system with simultaneous video-EEG recording was constructed.

•

The system was assembled at a reasonably low cost.

•

A TLE patient had a focal impaired awareness seizure during a driving task.

•

Timeline data of seizure evolution and driving impairment was directly recorded.

•

Throttle control ability had already been lost before the EEG signal change.

Risks of seizure with fatal traffic crash at wheel in people with epilepsy

PURPOSE

The Japanese authorities require a 2-year seizure-free period for a driver's license in people with epilepsy. To evaluate the stringency of the criteria, we calculated the risk of fatal traffic crashes by epileptic seizure and compared that to the risk of fatal traffic crashes among the general population.

METHODS

Nation-wide questionnaire surveys to physicians and their patients with epilepsy were conducted to determine the rate of seizure recurrence after given seizure-free periods, average driving time and the rate of traffic crashes by epileptic seizures. The risk of fatal traffic crashes by epileptic seizures was calculated using the method proposed by the Driving License Committee of the EU. The risk of fatal traffic crashes among subgroups of the general population was calculated using the national statistics available.

RESULTS

Valid answers were obtained from a total of 548 patients of 138 epilepsy-specialists and 102 non epilepsy-specialist physicians. The relative risks of fatal traffic crashes in people with epilepsy with 1-year and 2-year seizure-free periods were 1.22 and 1.15, compared to the general population, while the ones in males in their twenties, people aged 60 and over, people aged 65 and over, and people aged 75 and over among the general population were 1.71, 1.31, 1.52 and 2.69, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The risk of fatal traffic crashes in people with epilepsy for 1-year and 2-year seizure-free periods was estimated to be lower than that of some age groups in the general population. The increased risk in 1-year seizure freedom from that in 2-year seizure freedom was relatively small.

Counseling and Management of the Risks of Living With Epilepsy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

For patients living with epilepsy, quality of life is determined not only by seizure control but by mood, antiepileptic drug adverse effects, relationships, and access to education, employment, and transportation. This article reviews some of the most commonly encountered concerns associated with epilepsy, including mood disorders, driving, injuries, mortality, bone health, genetic burden, and impact on relationships.

RECENT FINDINGS

People with epilepsy are at increased risk for anxiety, depression, and suicide. Depression is underrecognized in patients with epilepsy, but effective validated screening tools are available for use. Mortality rates for people with epilepsy are 2 times higher than those of the general population, but much of this is attributable to underlying conditions rather than seizures. Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) occurs in an estimated 1:1000 adults with epilepsy per year, and the risk can be reduced by improved observation and seizure control. An increased risk of injury, including fractures, is also present in patients with epilepsy. Reduced bone health leading to increased fracture risk is an important negative consequence of long-term use of antiepileptic medication. Seizures while driving can also cause accidents and injury. Despite the importance of driving for people with epilepsy, physicians are underperforming in providing counsel about driving.

SUMMARY

Optimal care of the patient with epilepsy includes addressing risks to emotional health, physical health including fractures and SUDEP, social health, and an independent lifestyle. Identification of and treatments to reduce these risks can do more to improve quality of life than a narrow clinical focus on seizure control alone.

A decision tree to determine fitness to drive in epilepsy: Results of a pilot in two Australian states

OBJECTIVE

Certification by treating physicians of fitness to drive in people with epilepsy creates a conflict of interest that may result in unsafe decisions, damage the doctor-patient relationship, expose the physician to legal liability and prevent optimal treatment. Ideally, the treating physician should provide objective clinical information to the driver licensing authority (DLA), which then determines fitness or otherwise. However, DLAs in Australia do not employ medical staff and the national standards are complex. Fitness is determined by the treating physician, according to published national standards. The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility of using a decision tree to determine fitness, according to the Australian standards.

METHODS

A decision tree was constructed to use clinical data to determine whether a patient met the national standard to drive a private motorcar, failed to meet it or required further assessment. A form was designed to collect the necessary clinical data from the treating physician. A computerized version of the decision tree was then used in a pilot in two Australian states in parallel with the existing certification system. Four hundred thirty-nine drivers with declared epilepsy and their treating physicians were invited to participate when their annual driver licence review was due.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-three (58%) forms were returned. All patients were considered fit to drive by their physician. Seventy-six percent had not had a seizure for over two years. In 88.1%, there was agreement between the decision tree and treating physician, with 3.6% identified by the decision tree as requiring review. Although considered fit by their physician, 6.3% did not meet the national standard to drive.

SIGNIFICANCE

The decision tree model is a practical alternative to fitness certification by treating physicians. This Australian pilot can serve as a model for applying objective standards to driving assessments in other jurisdictions, using local driving standards. It has the potential to improve road safety by avoiding the negative effects of certification by treating physicians and can cope with complex standards. It is now in use in two states of Australia.

Who is driving and who is prone to have traffic accidents? A systematic review and meta-analysis among people with seizures

INTRODUCTION

Epilepsy influences the ability to drive. We aimed to systematically summarize factors associated with driving, holding a driver's license, and traffic accidents among people with seizures.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Eight databases were searched (from their inception to 27 June 2018). We included all published observational studies, except for case reports and studies with fewer than 50 participants. Pooled mean differences and pooled risk ratios (pRRs) with corresponding confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random effects.

RESULTS

Data were available from 18 studies, reporting a wide range of factors. There were frequent biases associated with cross-sectional study designs, selection bias, poor statistical quality, small samples, and lack of validation of models. The following six variables were consistently associated with driving: male gender (pRR: 1.42; 95% CI: 1.23 to 1.64), being in paid work (pRR: 1.72; 95% CI: 1.46 to 2.03), married (pRR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.57), older age at seizure onset or diagnosis (pooled mean difference: 4.83; 95% CI: 0.48 to 9.18 years), less frequent seizures (fewer than monthly, pRR: 1.32; 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.56), and taking one or no antiepileptic drug (pRR: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.63). Lower seizure frequency was also protective for avoiding traffic accidents (pRR: 0.26; 95% CI: 0.10 to 0.66).

DISCUSSION

Stable multivariate models to predict driving or traffic accidents among people with seizures have not yet been developed. Current evidence shows that the likelihood of driving is associated with demographic and epilepsy-related factors, while the risk of traffic accidents is associated with seizure frequency.

Driving status of patients with generalized spike-wave on EEG but no clinical seizures

Generalized spike-wave discharges (SWDs) are the hallmark of generalized epilepsy on the electroencephalogram (EEG). In clinically obvious cases, generalized SWDs produce myoclonic, atonic/tonic, or absence seizures with brief episodes of staring and behavioral unresponsiveness. However, some generalized SWDs have no obvious behavioral effects. A serious challenge arises when patients with no clinical seizures request driving privileges and licensure, yet their EEG shows generalized SWD. Specialized behavioral testing has demonstrated prolonged reaction times or missed responses during SWD, which may present a driving hazard even when patients or family members do not notice any deficits. On the other hand, some SWDs are truly asymptomatic in which case driving privileges should not be restricted. Clinicians often decide on driving privileges based on SWD duration or other EEG features. However, there are currently no empirically-validated guidelines for distinguishing generalized SWDs that are "safe" versus "unsafe" for driving. Here, we review the clinical presentation of generalized SWD and recent work investigating mechanisms of behavioral impairment during SWD with implications for driving safety. As a future approach, computational analysis of large sets of EEG data during simulated driving utilizing machine learning could lead to powerful methods to classify generalized SWD as safe vs. unsafe. This may ultimately provide more objective EEG criteria to guide decisions on driving safety in people with epilepsy.