Cannabinoids have been studied for their role in the treatment of epilepsy for many years. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved them for the treatment of some refractory syndromes in 2018. Cannabidiol and tetrahydrocannabinol are the most commonly studied cannabinoids and have been studied in great depth vis-à-vis their pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Studies have shown the efficacy of cannabinoids in the treatment of refractory epilepsy. A substantial amount of research has been performed exploring the interactions between cannabinoids and other conventional antiseizure medications. The exact mechanisms by which cannabinoids exert their effects on seizure control remain unclear and research into these mechanisms continues in great earnest. Cognitive changes from cannabinoids are constantly being studied and add to potential benefits from the use of these compounds. Cultural and social misconceptions and roadblocks about the use of cannabinoids persist and represent an ongoing obstacle to increasing research and therapeutic use of these compounds. This review focuses on all these aspects and of the use of these cannabinoids in the treatment of epilepsy and seeks to offer a fairly comprehensive description of the facets of cannabinoid therapy for refractory epilepsy.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Cerebral palsy (CP) is an umbrella term used to describe a group of non-progressive, but often changing motor impairment syndromes due to heterogeneous causes. Aim: The primary objective was to study the quality of life (QOL) of children aged 4–12 years with CP. The secondary objectives were to determine the correlation between QOL and demographic and clinical aspects. Materials and Methods: CP QOL-child, an Australia based questionnaire was translated and culturally adapted to 45 items. The questionnaire was then retranslated into English to ensure content and concepts were maintained. 50 parent-child dyads were interviewed after training of the primary interviewer. The statistical analysis of the data was done using statistical package for the social sciences software using t-test and Spearman correlation test. Results: The mean QOL score was within the “happy” range (66.38±10.38). The highest score was in “participation” and lowest in “special equipment.” Negative correlation was found in age with caregiver’s health (“your health”) and socioeconomic (SE) status with “others.” There was a positive correlation of paternal literacy with “communication,” “special equipment,” and “your health,” and “negative correlation of the number of siblings with others.” There was a negative correlation of gross motor classification system classes with “health” and manual ability classification system classes with mean QOL scores, “participation” and “health.” Conclusions: Increased access to special equipment is likely to help in improving QOL. There should be adequate support for the physical and mental health of parents and caregivers as well. Furthermore, caregivers must be educated and must be made aware of the disease. Comorbid conditions other than the primary disorder should not be ignored.

Purpose: Routine inpatient EEGs have been part of epilepsy practices for years. We aim to improve current routine EEG practices by studying their role at a large university hospital. Methods: Inpatient routine EEGs from January-July 2021 were included and patients <5 yrs., EEGs repeated on the same patient were excluded. Indications, floor status, abnormality, day of study, neurology consultation, results, treatment changes, discharge status, and prior AED use were analyzed using SAS 9.4. Results: The mean age for 250 patients was 57.27 yrs., where 54.22% were males and 45.78% were females. Indications listed were 26.5% altered mental status, 59.83% seizures, and 13.65% others. 87.36% of ICU patients had abnormal EEG vs 73.75% of floor patients. A significant association (p=0.0147) was found between floor status and EEG results. Abnormalities were 44% generalized slowing, 23.6% focal slowing, 9.2% epileptiform activity, and 23.2% others. Treatment was changed in 21.03% with abnormal vs 5.56% with normal EEG. AEDs were added in 18.46% with abnormal vs 3.7% with normal EEG. A significant association (p=0.014) was found between Neurology consultation and treatment change and with AED addition respectively. EEG result was associated with treatment change and AED addition. “Abnormal EEG” was significantly associated with further study. A significant association (p=0.0351) was found between EEG results and discharge status. 53.82% of patients were not on AED before EEG vs 46.18%. Prior AED had no association with EEG results. Conclusions: It is helpful to consult Neurology. Longer duration of routine EEGs may not show abnormalities. Routine EEG facilitates discharges and guides further workup.