Quality improvement in neurology: AAN epilepsy quality measures Report of the Quality Measurement and Reporting Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology

Department of Neurology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Neurology (Impact Factor: 8.3). 01/2011; 76(1):94-9. DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e318203e9d1
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Epilepsy is a common neurologic condition with significant personal, societal, medical, and economic burdens. There are considerable gaps in the quality of care delivered. Measuring the quality of care delivered is the first step to its improvement. Performance measures are easily identified and quantitated ways to assess whether specific activities were carried out during a patient encounter. Therefore, epilepsy performance measures were derived through a standardized systematic process and may be the basis for pay-for-performance initiatives and maintenance of certification requirements.
Epilepsy measures were developed through the American Medical Association-convened Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement (PCPI) independent measure development process, which marked the first time a medical specialty society followed this process. Guidelines, measures, and consensus papers reviewed for the period 1998 to 2008 using the National Guidelines Clearinghouse, the National Quality Measures Clearinghouse, PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library were evaluated using a framework to determine the acceptability of each guideline or other evidence review document for measures development. Recommendation statements based on level of evidence, importance, validity, and gap in care were developed into candidate measures. A panel of experts from representative organizations vetted the measures. A period of public comment was followed by approval from the American Academy of Neurology and the PCPI.
Literature search identified 160 relevant recommendation statements from 19 guidelines and 2 consensus papers. Systematic assessment resulted in 20 recommendation statements that were refined to 8 candidate measures by the expert panel. The measures are relevant to seizure type and frequency, etiology or epilepsy syndrome, EEG, neuroimaging, antiepileptic drug side effects, safety issues, referral for refractory epilepsy, and issues for women of childbearing potential.
There is a reasonable evidence base, and consensus for, deriving performance measures for quality of epilepsy care. It is anticipated that implementation of these performance measures will improve care for patients with epilepsy if adopted by providers.

Download full-text


Available from: Paul C. Van Ness, Mar 19, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) is a major cause of mortality in epilepsy. Despite its devastating consequences, SUDEP appears to be poorly discussed with patients by health professionals. The risk of causing psychological distress to the patient is highlighted as a reason for not discussing SUDEP. However, no studies have assessed the adult patients' views on this important question. We conducted this cross-sectional study to evaluate the awareness and perspectives on SUDEP among adult patients with epilepsy. One hundred five consecutive adult patients with epilepsy, referred to the Epilepsy Clinic of a tertiary hospital between October 2012 and November 2013, were surveyed to ascertain their views and understanding of SUDEP. The data were analyzed using logistic regression to explore the association between patients' awareness of SUDEP and characteristics such as age, gender, duration of epilepsy, level of education, and employment. Awareness of SUDEP among adult patients with epilepsy was poor (14.3%). However, the vast majority (89.5%) wished to be informed about SUDEP, and 59% requested detailed information. The treating neurologist was considered to be the most appropriate source of SUDEP information by 85.6% of patients. Multivariable analysis of the data showed no association between characteristics of patients (age, gender, duration of epilepsy, level of education, and employment) and their awareness of SUDEP or desire to get SUDEP-related information. Our study suggests that the majority of adult patients wish to be informed about SUDEP. This is in contrast to the general reluctance of medical professionals to inform all patients routinely about this condition. Crown Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Epilepsy & Behavior 12/2014; 42C:29-34. DOI:10.1016/j.yebeh.2014.11.007 · 2.06 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Epilepsy is one of the commonest neurological disorders, estimated to affect more than 60 million people worldwide. In the majority of these patients, seizures can be effectively suppressed with antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Still, a significant percentage of patients (estimated to exceed 40% in some studies) exhibit pharmacoresistance during the course of their frequently lifelong condition.We review our current understanding of some of the many missing pieces that constitute the puzzle of pharmacoresistant epilepsy (PRE), which can be practically defined as failure to achieve seizure freedom following adequate trials of two tolerated and appropriately chosen AEDs. The complexity of PRE reflects the dynamic nature of the underlying disease biology and the multiplicity of mechanisms of drug resistance.We summarize some of the known clinical predictors, patterns and causes of treatment failure and examine potential underlying pathophysiological mechanisms and implications for the development of future therapies
    03/2013; 1(1):38–42. DOI:10.1016/j.epilep.2013.01.001
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Guidelines for refractory epilepsy recommend timely referral of potential surgical candidates to an epilepsy center for evaluation. However, this approach is seldom a priority for treating neurologists, possibly because of inertia of previous practice and personal attitudes, leading to a buildup of psychosocial disabilities and increased risk of morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to assess knowledge and attitudes toward epilepsy surgery among practicing neurologists and identify the barriers that delay the treatment. We surveyed 183 Italian adult and child neurologists with an ad hoc questionnaire exploring physicians' willingness to refer patients for epilepsy surgery when such treatment may be indicated. Thirteen of 14 questions had graded answers ranging from 1 (unfavorable to surgery) to 10 (favorable). We compared the overall scores and per-question scores of the neurologists versus a group of academic and clinical leaders in the field. The neurologists gave responses characterized by extreme variability (i.e., wide response interquartile range) around intermediate scores. Experts had higher and less variable scores favoring surgery. The two groups differed significantly on issues such as how long to pursue pharmacologic treatment and information about indications and outcome of surgery. Multivariate analysis indicated that neurologists' attitudes correlated with the number of patients referred for surgery (p < 0.01) and the geographical region where specialty was attained (p < 0.01). Other variables such as years in practice, number of patients treated for epilepsy, or type of specialty had no predictive value on physicians' behavior. The majority of Italian neurologists have highly variable attitudes toward epilepsy surgery, reflecting ambivalence and uncertainty toward this type of treatment. About two thirds of responders are nonaligned with the opinion leaders, mainly due to differences in handling pharmacologic treatment and information regarding epilepsy surgery, which affect their attitudes and ultimately patient management. Strategies that may solve the lack of agreement include reinforcing the concept of pharmacoresistance and associated risks, as opposed to the safety and potential benefits of surgery, the use of epilepsy quality measures during follow-up, and the adoption of structured referral sheets and greater involvement of patients in decision making. These measures should facilitate the referral of potential candidates for surgical evaluation and improve overall quality of care.
    Epilepsia 01/2012; 53(1):35-43. DOI:10.1111/j.1528-1167.2011.03282.x · 4.58 Impact Factor