Socioeconomic status and self-management in epilepsy: Comparison of diverse clinical populations in Houston, Texas

Begley, Charles E.; Shegog, Ross; Iyagba, Biebele; Chen, Vincent; Talluri, Krishna; Dubinsky, Stephanie; Newmark, Michael; Ojukwu, Nikki; Friedman, David Adam

doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2010.08.020

Cited by 35 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of 6,368 abstracts identified by the search, 125 were reviewed in full text, and 25 studies (Fig. ), all published since 1993, met eligibility criteria and constitute the dataset for the analyses . Of the 6,243 citations excluded before full‐text review, approximately 40% dealt with epilepsy but did not address or measure SEC; about 35% mentioned seizure or epilepsy in the title or abstract but actually did not deal with epilepsy as a topic; about 10% were commentary, reviews, or editorial with no original data; and about 5% were case reports or duplicate publications.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient satisfaction with care in epilepsy: How much do we know?

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYObjective: Satisfaction with epilepsy care (SEC) encompasses care delivery, expectations, attitudes, and disease course. Through a systematic review of the evidence, we explore how and where the SEC of patients is being measured, the level of SEC overall and in specific domains, and its relationship to clinical and demographic variables. Methods: We searched Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and EMBASE using medical subject headings and keywords related to satisfaction with care and epilepsy in adults and children, in all languages. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and full-text articles. We examined the clinical context and patient characteristics, type and content of satisfaction scales, and reported outcomes. Abstracted variables were grouped for descriptive purposes and presented as medians and proportions when the data allowed it. Results: Of 25 included studies (6,336 patients), 88% were performed in the United States or the United Kingdom. Nine studies (36%) used validated instruments and 16 studies (64%) used nonvalidated instruments. For SEC domains reported in >1 study, the median proportion (interquartile range) of patients satisfied with epilepsy care was 86% (17%) for overall satisfaction with care, 85% (24%) for interpersonal skills, 78% (3%) for access to care, 67% (32%) for communication, and 65% (15%) for knowledge/ technical skills. Communication and clinicians' knowledge was important in all settings. Patients seen in specialized settings and those receiving more and better information had higher SEC ratings. There was no consistent association between SEC and quality of care indicators. Significance: Data on SEC have been reported infrequently. Patients are least satisfied with communication, perceived skills, and knowledge of care providers. Epilepsy-specific SEC tools have neither been validated nor do they contain many of the important domains identified by this review. The relationship between SEC and indicators of quality of care requires further study. Measures aimed at improving education and communication could improve SEC.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient satisfaction with care in epilepsy: How much do we know?

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…People with epilepsy who feel that they have little control over their condition (external locus of control) are more likely to be depressed and show poor adaptation to their illness compared with individuals who have internal locus of control [5]. However, research has found little support for SES-based disparities in selfmanagement of epilepsy [50]. In addition, social support can improve psychological well-being of PWE.…”

Section: Psychosocial Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social determinants of health in epilepsy

Szaflarski

2014

Epilepsy & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In fact, this has become even more important as the introduction of new antiepileptic drugs, the use of generic medication, the marketing of brain stimulation devices and the resurgence of new surgical treatment options can result in a considerable increase in costs or a shift in the distribution of cost components [6][7][8][9][10]. Furthermore, epilepsy is still strongly associated with social stigma, reduced employment opportunities and impaired quality of life for patients and their carers, resulting in increased indirect as well as intangible costs [11][12][13][14][15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%