Summary:Purpose: There is a notion that people with epilepsy have substantial and often unrecognized comorbidity of chronic conditions. However, most studies focus on selected patient groups; population-based studies are scarce. We compared the prevalence of chronic somatic conditions in people with epilepsy with that in the general population using Canadian, nationwide, population-based health data.Method: We examined epilepsy-specific and general population health data obtained through two previously validated, independently performed, door-to-door Canadian health surveys, the National Population Health Survey (NPHS, N = 49,000) and the Community Health Survey (CHS, N = 130882), which represent 98% of the Canadian population. The prevalence of epilepsy and 19 other chronic conditions was ascertained through direct inquiry from respondents about physician-diagnosed illnesses. Weighted prevalence, prevalence ratios (PR), and 95% confidence intervals were obtained for the entire population and for males and females separately. Multivariate analyses assessed the strength of association of comorbid conditions with epilepsy as compared with the general population.Results: People with epilepsy had a statistically significant higher prevalence of most chronic conditions than the general population. Conditions with particularly high prevalence in epilepsy (prevalence ratio ≥ 2.0) include stomach/intestinal ulcers (PR, CHS 2.5, NPHS 2.7), stroke (PR, CHS 3.9, NPHS 4.7), urinary incontinence (PR, CHS 3.2, NPHS 4.4), bowel disorders (PR, CHS 2.0, NPHS 3.3), migraine (PR, CHS 2.0, NPHS 2.6), Alzheimer's disease (PR, NPHS 4.3), and chronic fatigue (PR, CHS 4.1). There were no gender-specific differences in prevalence of chronic conditions among people with epilepsy.Conclusions: People with epilepsy in the general population, not only those actively seeking medical care, have a high prevalence of chronic somatic comorbid conditions. The findings are consistent across two independent surveys, which show that people with epilepsy in the general population have a two-to fivefold risk of somatic comorbid conditions, as compared with people without epilepsy. This patient-centered comorbidity profile reflects health aspects that are important to people with epilepsy, and indicate the need for a more integrated approach to people with epilepsy. The impact of epilepsy relative to other comorbid conditions requires further analysis, as does the contribution of comorbidity to epilepsy intractability and to differential health care needs. Similarly, it remains to be determined whether the observed comorbidity patterns are specific to epilepsy or simply reflect a pattern that is common to chronic illnesses in general.
Background: Health related quality of life (HRQOL) is increasingly recognised as an important outcome in epilepsy. However, interpretation of HRQOL data is difficult because there is no agreement on what constitutes a clinically important change in the scores of the various instruments. Objectives: To determine the minimum clinically important change, and small, medium, and large changes, in broadly used epilepsy specific and generic HRQOL instruments. Methods: Patients with difficult to control focal epilepsy (n = 136) completed the QOLIE-89, QOLIE-31, SF-36, and HUI-III questionnaires twice, six months apart. Patient centred estimates of minimum important change, and of small, medium, and large change, were assessed on self administered 15 point global rating scales. Using regression analysis, the change in each HRQOL instrument that corresponded to the various categories of change determined by patients was obtained. The results were validated in a subgroup of patients tested at baseline and at nine months. Results: The minimum important change was 10.1 for QOLIE-89, 11.8 for QOLIE-31, 4.6 for SF-36 MCS, 3.0 for SF-36 physical composite score, and 0.15 for HUI-III. All instruments differentiated between no change and minimum important change with precision, and QOLIE-89 and QOLIE-31 also distinguished accurately between minimum important change and medium or large change. Baseline HRQOL scores and the type of treatment (surgical or medical) had no impact on any of the estimates, and the results were replicated in the validation sample. Conclusions: These estimates of minimum important change, and small, medium, and large changes, in four HRQOL instruments in patients with epilepsy are robust and can distinguish accurately among different levels of change. The estimates allow for categorisation of patients into various levels of change in HRQOL, and will be of use in assessing the effect of interventions in individual patients.
Summary:Purpose: Controversy exists about the relation of societal knowledge and attitudes regarding epilepsy. We conducted a survey to examine knowledge and attitudes, to note gender and occupational influences, and to examine the effect of an informational brochure.Methods: We administered a standardized questionnaire that noted demographics and examined knowledge and attitudes regarding epilepsy and persons with epilepsy, respectively, to a wide variety of Canadian college students. In a separate class we gave every other student a brochure regarding epilepsy and then administered the questionnaire to both the naïve and brochure-exposed students.Results: Knowledge was patchy and weakest for the approximate prevalence of epilepsy in the population, hereditary epilepsy and several other etiologies, recognition of nonconvulsive seizures as a type of epilepsy, and knowledge of antiepileptic drug-induced teratogenicity. In contrast, attitudes were more uniformly favorable. However, 11 and 14%, respectively, showed negative bias against persons with epilepsy having children and equal opportunity for occupational employment. Women were slightly but significantly more tolerant than men. The brochure-exposed group showed better knowledge but equivalent attitudes compared with the naïve group.Conclusions: Results compare favorably with surveys in other countries. Although knowledge was patchy, it could be easily improved on with an educational brochure. Attitudes were positive but show some discrepancies from knowledge and a gender effect.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.