Structure and Outcomes of Educational Programs for Training Non-electroencephalographers in Performing and Screening Adult EEG: A Systematic Review

Kromm, Julie; Fiest, Kirsten M.; Alkhachroum, Ayham; Josephson, Colin B.; Kramer, Andreas H.

doi:10.1007/s12028-020-01172-2

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…qEEG as a screening tool to identify seizures may have great value because electroencephalographer review of EEGs is infrequent [15] and often not available in real time. Critical care providers' qEEG reading performance has been evaluated in multiple studies, with high sensitivity and specificity for presence of seizures [21,22,29,[37][38][39][40]. In the intensive care setting, the sensitivity and specificity for qEEG novices screening for seizures ranged from 40 to 93% and from 38 to 95%, respectively [21,24,[26][27][28][29][39][40][41].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Critical care providers' qEEG reading performance has been evaluated in multiple studies, with high sensitivity and specificity for presence of seizures [21,22,29,[37][38][39][40]. In the intensive care setting, the sensitivity and specificity for qEEG novices screening for seizures ranged from 40 to 93% and from 38 to 95%, respectively [21,24,[26][27][28][29][39][40][41]. Our study validates the findings of prior reports; raters with prior qEEG experience had high sensitivity, adequate specificity, and low FPRs when identifying presence of seizures, whereas raters without prior qEEG experience had high sensitivity, low specificity, and high FPRs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most studies have used a single qEEG trend, whereas few have examined the accuracy of multiple ≥ 2) qEEG trends in identifying NCS in patients with a variety of pathologies [21,22,27,28,40,42]. Color density spectral array and aEEG are among the most used trends.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Quantitative EEG-Based Seizure Estimation in Super-Refractory Status Epilepticus

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of seizure burden in patients with superrefractory status epilepticus (SRSE) by using quantitative electroencephalography (qEEG).Methods: EEG recordings from 69 patients with SRSE (2009SRSE ( -2019 were reviewed and annotated for seizures by three groups of reviewers: two board-certified neurophysiologists using only raw EEG (gold standard), two neurocritical care providers with substantial experience in qEEG analysis (qEEG experts), and two inexperienced qEEG readers (qEEG novices) using only a qEEG trend panel.Results: Raw EEG experts identified 35 (51%) patients with seizures, accounting for 2950 seizures (3,126 min). qEEG experts had a sensitivity of 93%, a specificity of 61%, a false positive rate of 6.5 per day, and good agreement (κ = 0.64) between both qEEG experts. qEEG novices had a sensitivity of 98.5%, a specificity of 13%, a false positive rate of 15 per day, and fair agreement (κ = 0.4) between both qEEG novices. Seizure burden was not different between the qEEG experts and the gold standard (3,257 vs. 3,126 min), whereas qEEG novices reported higher burden (6066 vs. 3126 min).Conclusions: Both qEEG experts and novices had a high sensitivity but a low specificity for seizure detection in patients with SRSE. qEEG could be a useful tool for qEEG experts to estimate seizure burden in patients with SRSE.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quantitative EEG-Based Seizure Estimation in Super-Refractory Status Epilepticus

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Besides, several studies have suggested that non-EEG experts such as bedside ICU personnel can be trained in the acquisition and troubleshooting of EEGs, as well as screening uninterrupted raw EEG for seizure detection purposes [ 22 , 23 ].…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges and Prospects in Epilepsy Monitoring Units: A Comprehensive Review of Logistic Barriers

Albarrak

2024

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological diseases with a prevalence ranging from 0.5% to 2% in different sittings. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that nearly 80% of this burden is borne by resource-poor countries where even conventional electroencephalogram (EEG) coverage is dramatically short.Video EEG monitoring applied for days as conducted in epilepsy monitoring units (EMUs) is aimed at seizure localization, anti-seizure medication (ASM) adjustment, or epilepsy surgery evaluation and planning. However, the EEG approach in EMUs has its obstacles. The present article is aimed to concentrate on the logistic challenges of EMUs, discussing existing data and limitations and offering suggestions for future planning to enhance the utilization of existing technology.Shortages of adult and pediatric epileptologists, qualified nurses, as well as EEG technologists have been reported in different countries. Moreover, injuries and falls, psychosis, status epilepticus, and unexpected death have been stated to be the most frequent safety issues in EMUs. Enhancements to mitigate logistical and healthcare system-related barriers in EMUs include the implementation of large cohort studies and the utilization of artificial intelligence (AI) for the identification and categorization of specific risks among EMU admissions. The establishment of EMUs and their associated challenges and barriers are best acknowledged through discussions and dialogue with various stakeholders.

show abstract

“…The QUADAS-2 is used to assess the risk of bias and applicability concerns in the study. Each study will be assessed from 4 domains: participant/measure selection, index test, reference standard, and flow and timing [54]. Classification of studies as low risk and high risk of bias and applicability will be based on these four domains.…”

Section: Quality Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanism, measurement, and quantification of stress in decision process: a model based systematic-review protocol

Su¹,

Li²,

Yang³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:: Every human action begins with decision-making. Stress is a significant source of biases that can influence human decision-making. In order to understand the relationship between stress and decision-making, stress quantification is fundamental. Different methods of measuring and quantifying stress in decision-making have been described in the literature while an up-to-date systematic review of the existing methods is lacking. Moreover, mental stress, mental effort, cognitive workload, and workload are often used interchangeably but should be distinguished to enable in-depth investigations of decision-mechanisms. Our objectives are to clarify stress related concepts and review the measurement, quantification, and application of stress during decision making activities.Methods:: We developed and followed a systematic reviews protocol to analyze the literature related to stress in decision-making. We systematically searched Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and ERIC (EBSCO) between 1990 and 2020 with English language. We will include any literature reporting measurable stress-related outcomes, including stress, workload, cognitive workload, mental effort during the decision-making process. All research designs investigating the quantification and measurement of stress for healthy adults are eligible for this review. Research postulates are proposed based on the stress-effort model. Two reviewers will independently screen the articles for inclusion and assess for study quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. We will extract data from each study including research objective, research method, research domain, triggering method, objective measure, subjective measure, and research results for knowledge syntheses.Discussion:: The physiological responses to stress are proposed for verification. This systematic review will provide knowledge on decision mechanisms under stress and stress related concepts. The improved understanding on stress measurement, quantification, and application in specific research context will advance methods to study and optimize decision making.

show abstract

Structure and Outcomes of Educational Programs for Training Non-electroencephalographers in Performing and Screening Adult EEG: A Systematic Review

Cited by 7 publications

References 68 publications

Quantitative EEG-Based Seizure Estimation in Super-Refractory Status Epilepticus

Quantitative EEG-Based Seizure Estimation in Super-Refractory Status Epilepticus

Challenges and Prospects in Epilepsy Monitoring Units: A Comprehensive Review of Logistic Barriers

Mechanism, measurement, and quantification of stress in decision process: a model based systematic-review protocol

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About