1
|
Suen CG, Wood AJ, Burke JF, Guterman EL. Emergency department and inpatient interhospital transfers for patients with status epilepticus. Epilepsia 2025; 66:1199-1209. [PMID: 39797606 DOI: 10.1111/epi.18254] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2024] [Revised: 12/18/2024] [Accepted: 12/19/2024] [Indexed: 01/13/2025]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Interhospital transfers for status epilepticus (SE) are common, and some are avoidable and likely lower yield. The use of interhospital transfer may differ in emergency department (ED) and inpatient settings, which contend with differing clinical resources and financial incentives. However, transfer from these two settings is understudied, leaving gaps in our ability to improve the hospital experience, cost, and triage for this neurologic emergency. We aimed to describe interhospital transfer for SE and examine the relationship between the site of transfer and hospital length of stay. METHODS We performed a cross-sectional study of adult patients with SE who underwent interhospital transfer using data from the State Emergency Department Databases and State Inpatient Databases of Florida (2016-2019) and New York (2018-2019). The primary outcome was discharge after undergoing transfer. Secondary outcomes were discharge within 1 day, discharge after 30 days, receipt of electroencephalography (EEG), and discharge disposition. RESULTS There were 10 461 encounters for SE. Of 1790 ED encounters without admission to the same hospital, 324 (18.1%) resulted in transfer. Of 8671 hospitalizations, 629 (7.3%) resulted in transfer. Patients transferred from the ED were younger, more likely were White, more likely were in a metro area, and had fewer medical comorbidities than patients transferred from the inpatient setting. The median time to discharge was 5 days (interquartile range [IQR] = 2.0-9.0) after ED transfer and 10 days (IQR = 4.0-20.0) after inpatient transfer. There were 58 (17.9%) patients who were discharged within 1 day after undergoing transfer from an ED. ED transfers had higher rates of discharge at 30 days and higher likelihood of undergoing EEG at the receiving hospital and being discharged home. SIGNIFICANCE A high proportion of patients with SE are discharged shortly after undergoing interhospital transfer, particularly those transferred from the ED. Understanding reasons for transfer is a crucial next step in triaging limited inpatient epilepsy resources and reducing costs associated with interhospital transfer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Catherine G Suen
- Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Andrew J Wood
- Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - James F Burke
- Department of Neurology, Ohio State Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Elan L Guterman
- Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
- Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Simma L, Kammerl A, Ramantani G. Point-of-care EEG in the pediatric emergency department: a systematic review. Eur J Pediatr 2025; 184:231. [PMID: 40053132 PMCID: PMC11889061 DOI: 10.1007/s00431-025-06059-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2024] [Revised: 02/07/2025] [Accepted: 02/24/2025] [Indexed: 03/10/2025]
Abstract
Central nervous system (CNS) disorders, including seizures, status epilepticus (SE), and altered mental status, constitute a significant proportion of cases presenting in the pediatric emergency department. EEG is essential for diagnosing nonconvulsive SE, but standard EEG is often unavailable due to resource constraints. Point-of-care EEG (pocEEG) has emerged as a viable alternative, offering rapid bedside assessment. This systematic review synthesizes existing data on the use of pocEEG in pediatric emergencies and highlights research gaps. A comprehensive search of PubMed, CINAHL, and EMBASE identified six studies on pediatric populations using simplified EEG montages, with cohort sizes ranging from 20 to 242 patients. The findings indicate that pocEEG is feasible in acute pediatric care, effectively aiding in the detection of nonconvulsive SE and other critical neurological conditions. The studies varied in electrode placement strategies, ranging from neonatal to subhairline montages. CONCLUSION Despite some implementation challenges, pocEEG has shown sufficient accuracy for clinical use. Further research should focus on optimizing EEG montages, refining interpretation, and assessing its impact on patient outcomes. This review underscores the potential of pocEEG to address critical care needs in pediatric emergency departments and calls for larger, standardized studies. WHAT IS KNOWN • Central nervous system (CNS) disorders, such as seizures and altered mental status, are common and critical conditions encountered in pediatric emergency resuscitation bays. • EEG is essential for diagnosing nonconvulsive status epilepticus, but standard EEG is often unavailable in emergency departments due to logistical challenges, limited resources, and the need for specialized interpretation. WHAT IS NEW • Reduced-lead, point-of-care EEG (pocEEG) is a feasible alternative for real-time bedside CNS monitoring in pediatric emergency settings, aiding in the diagnosis of nonconvulsive status epilepticus and guiding the management of convulsive status epilepticus. • This systematic review highlights the feasibility and clinical potential of pocEEG in pediatric emergency departments and identifies key areas for further research, including the development of standardized pocEEG protocols and the integration of automated EEG analysis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leopold Simma
- Emergency Department, University Children's Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
- Children's Research Center, University Children's Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
| | - Anna Kammerl
- Emergency Department, University Children's Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Georgia Ramantani
- Children's Research Center, University Children's Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Department of Neuropediatrics, University Children's Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Lu A, Chandra K, Kovalev D, Savarese EN, Patel K, McCarthy DC, Eisenschenk S, Haneef Z. EEG Infrastructure Within the Veterans Administration: A Survey. J Clin Neurophysiol 2024:00004691-990000000-00183. [PMID: 39531283 DOI: 10.1097/wnp.0000000000001132] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE EEG is a vital tool in the diagnosis and management of neurologic conditions prevalent among veterans such as seizures, epilepsy, and brain injuries. This cross-sectional study aimed to assess the state of EEG infrastructure within the Veterans Administration (VA), focusing on availability, utilization, and the potential avenues to addressing gaps in infrastructure. METHODS This survey was distributed to 123 VA hospitals using the Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) platform, gathering data on EEG equipment, staffing, and service provision from June to December 2023. RESULTS Of the 123 VA hospitals surveyed, 70 responded (56.9% response rate). Most respondents (88.6%) reported having EEG services, although only 38.7% offering continuous EEG (cEEG). Respondents reported having less EEG technologists, machines, and faculty readers than what they thought would be ideal. Significant correlations were found between the availability of resources (e.g., number of EEG machines) and service capabilities, including remote access and cEEG. The use of alternative EEG technologies such as rapid or quantitative EEG varied greatly. Interest in participating in the VA Tele-EEG program was reported by 59.4% of respondents. CONCLUSIONS There is large variability in EEG infrastructure across the VA. Tele-EEG has the potential to maintain continuity of operations through challenges affecting staffing and to improve EEG service access, especially in resource-limited settings. Expanding access to quantitative, rapid, and tele-EEG services may enhance patient management and may be a potential avenue to explore as the VA continues to invest in and grow its capacity for treating neurologic conditions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alisa Lu
- Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | - Krishna Chandra
- Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | - Dmitri Kovalev
- Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
- Neurology Care Line, Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Edward N Savarese
- National Tele-EEG Program, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Kamakshi Patel
- Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
- Neurology Care Line, Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, Texas
- National Tele-EEG Program, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - David C McCarthy
- National Tele-EEG Program, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Neurology, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston Massachusetts
| | - Stephan Eisenschenk
- National Tele-EEG Program, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts
- Malcolm Randall VA Medical Center, Gainesville, Florida; and
- University of Florida Health, Gainesville, Florida
| | - Zulfi Haneef
- Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
- Neurology Care Line, Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, Texas
- National Tele-EEG Program, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Terman SW, Guterman EL, Lin CC, Thompson MP, Burke JF. Hospital variation of outcomes in status epilepticus. Epilepsia 2024; 65:1415-1427. [PMID: 38407370 PMCID: PMC11087197 DOI: 10.1111/epi.17927] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2023] [Revised: 02/06/2024] [Accepted: 02/12/2024] [Indexed: 02/27/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Understanding factors driving variation in status epilepticus outcomes would be critical to improve care. We evaluated the degree to which patient and hospital characteristics explained hospital-to-hospital variability in intubation and postacute outcomes. METHODS This was a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries admitted with status epilepticus between 2009 and 2019. Outcomes included intubation, discharge to a facility, and 30- and 90-day readmissions and mortality. Multilevel models calculated percent variation in each outcome due to hospital-to-hospital differences. RESULTS We included 29 150 beneficiaries. The median age was 68 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 57-78), and 18 084 (62%) were eligible for Medicare due to disability. The median (IQR) percentages of each outcome across hospitals were: 30-day mortality 25% (0%-38%), any 30-day readmission 14% (0%-25%), 30-day status epilepticus readmission 0% (0%-3%), 30-day facility stay 40% (25%-53%), and intubation 46% (20%-61%). However, after accounting for many hospitals with small sample size, hospital-to-hospital differences accounted for 2%-6% of variation in all unadjusted outcomes, and approximately 1%-5% (maximally 8% for 30-day readmission for status epilepticus) after adjusting for patient, hospitalization, and/or hospital characteristics. Although many characteristics significantly predicted outcomes, the largest effect size was cardiac arrest predicting death (odds ratio = 10.1, 95% confidence interval = 8.8-11.7), whereas hospital characteristics (e.g., staffing, accreditation, volume, setting, services) all had lesser effects. SIGNIFICANCE Hospital-to-hospital variation explained little variation in studied outcomes. Rather, certain patient characteristics (e.g., cardiac arrest) had greater effects. Interventions to improve outcomes after status epilepticus may be better focused on individual or prehospital factors, rather than at the inpatient systems level.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samuel W Terman
- University of Michigan, Department of Neurology, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Elan L Guterman
- University of California, San Francisco, Department of Neurology, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Chun C Lin
- the Ohio State University, Department of Neurology, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Michael P Thompson
- University of Michigan, Department of Cardiac Surgery and Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - James F Burke
- the Ohio State University, Department of Neurology, Columbus, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Ney JP, Nuwer MR, Hirsch LJ, Burdelle M, Trice K, Parvizi J. The Cost of After-Hour Electroencephalography. Neurol Clin Pract 2024; 14:e200264. [PMID: 38585440 PMCID: PMC10997216 DOI: 10.1212/cpj.0000000000200264] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2023] [Accepted: 11/21/2023] [Indexed: 04/09/2024]
Abstract
Background and Objectives High costs associated with after-hour electroencephalography (EEG) constitute a barrier for financially constrained hospitals to provide this neurodiagnostic procedure outside regular working hours. Our study aims to deepen our understanding of the cost elements involved in delivering EEG services during after-hours. Methods We accessed publicly available data sets and created a cost model depending on 3 most commonly seen staffing scenarios: (1) technologist on-site, (2) technologist on-call from home, and (3) a hybrid of the two. Results Cost of EEG depends on the volume of testing and the staffing plan. Within the various cost elements, labor cost of EEG technologists is the predominant expenditure, which varies across geographic regions and urban areas. Discussion We provide a model to explain why access to EEGs during after-hours has a substantial expense. This model provides a cost calculator tool (made available as part of this publication in eAppendix 1, links.lww.com/CPJ/A513) to estimate the cost of EEG platform based on site-specific staffing scenarios and annual volume.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John P Ney
- School of Medicine (JPN), Boston University, MA; Departments of Neurology (MRN), University of California Los Angeles David Geffen School of Medicine; Department of Neurology (LJH), Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences (MB, JP), Stanford University School of Medicine, CA; and Neurodiagnostic Technology Programs (KT), Institute of Health Sciences, Hunt Valley, MD
| | - Marc R Nuwer
- School of Medicine (JPN), Boston University, MA; Departments of Neurology (MRN), University of California Los Angeles David Geffen School of Medicine; Department of Neurology (LJH), Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences (MB, JP), Stanford University School of Medicine, CA; and Neurodiagnostic Technology Programs (KT), Institute of Health Sciences, Hunt Valley, MD
| | - Lawrence J Hirsch
- School of Medicine (JPN), Boston University, MA; Departments of Neurology (MRN), University of California Los Angeles David Geffen School of Medicine; Department of Neurology (LJH), Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences (MB, JP), Stanford University School of Medicine, CA; and Neurodiagnostic Technology Programs (KT), Institute of Health Sciences, Hunt Valley, MD
| | - Mark Burdelle
- School of Medicine (JPN), Boston University, MA; Departments of Neurology (MRN), University of California Los Angeles David Geffen School of Medicine; Department of Neurology (LJH), Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences (MB, JP), Stanford University School of Medicine, CA; and Neurodiagnostic Technology Programs (KT), Institute of Health Sciences, Hunt Valley, MD
| | - Kellee Trice
- School of Medicine (JPN), Boston University, MA; Departments of Neurology (MRN), University of California Los Angeles David Geffen School of Medicine; Department of Neurology (LJH), Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences (MB, JP), Stanford University School of Medicine, CA; and Neurodiagnostic Technology Programs (KT), Institute of Health Sciences, Hunt Valley, MD
| | - Josef Parvizi
- School of Medicine (JPN), Boston University, MA; Departments of Neurology (MRN), University of California Los Angeles David Geffen School of Medicine; Department of Neurology (LJH), Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences (MB, JP), Stanford University School of Medicine, CA; and Neurodiagnostic Technology Programs (KT), Institute of Health Sciences, Hunt Valley, MD
| |
Collapse
|