Clinicians' vs. technicians' history when obtaining an EEG

Abstract

The practical value or usefulness of any investigation is dependent upon the clinical information provided and subsequent interpretation; this is particularly important in the investigation and classification of the epilepsies. For two months the histories from clinicians and EEG technicians were prospectively evaluated from 255 consecutive patients. The histories were interpreted by a single paediatric neurologist who was blinded to their origin. The histories were reported as "adequate' or "inadequate', and "diagnostic' or "non-diagnostic' (of epilepsy). Overall 92% and 40% of technicians' and 41% and 13% of clinicians' histories were considered to have been "adequate' and "diagnostic', respectively. These results have implications for the electro-clinical interpretation of the EEG.

Non‐epileptic clinical diagnoses in children referred for an outpatient EEG using video monitoring

“…Details of the clinical information provided by the doctor requesting the EEG varied, from “Does this child have epilepsy?” to simply enclosing a copy of an outpatient clinic letter. Additional clinical information on the description of the child's paroxysmal episodes and any relevant family history (including of epilepsy) was also routinely obtained by the EEG technicians at the time of the EEG (Beirne et al 1996). All children underwent digital EEG and simultaneous video (CCTV) recordings using a Micromed Brain Quick System.…”