Abstract
Objective This retrospective chart review aims to quantify the rate of patients with intellectual disability (ID) accessing an Australian ambulatory EEG service, and understand the implications of discontinuing studies against medical advice.
Methods Electronic records of referrals, patient monitoring notes, and EEG reports were accessed retrospectively. Each referral was assessed to determine whether the patient had an ID. For each study where patients were discharged against medical advice, the outcomes of their EEG report were assessed and compared between the ID and non-ID groups. Exploratory analysis was performed assessing the effects of age, the percentage of the requested monitoring undertaken, and outcome rates as a function of monitoring duration.
Results There were significantly more patients in the ID group with early disconnection than the non-ID group (Chi squared test, p=0.000). There was no significant difference in the rates of clinical outcomes between the ID and non-ID groups amongst patients who disconnected early.
Conclusions Although rates of early disconnection are higher in those with ID, study outcomes are largely similar between patients with and without ID in this retrospective analysis of an ambulatory EEG service.
Significance Ambulatory EEG is a viable alternative to inpatient monitoring for patients with ID.
Highlights three bullet points (one sentence each, with a maximum of 130 characters - including spaces
Recording EEG remains a challenge for patients with epilepsy and ID
This study shows that patients with ID are more likely to disconnect early compared to those without ID
Study outcomes are not significantly different between those with and without ID, however some outcomes may be underpowered
Competing Interest Statement
ESN and MJC have a financial interest in Seer Medical Pty. Ltd.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was conducted under approval from the Human Research Ethics Committee of St Vincents Hospital Melbourne 042-18.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
