Cargando…

Better evidence for earlier assessment and surgical intervention for refractory epilepsy (The BEST study): a mixed methods study protocol

INTRODUCTION: One-third of patients with refractory epilepsy may be candidates for resective surgery, which can lead to positive clinical outcomes if efficiently managed. In Australia, there is currently between a 6-month and 2-year delay for patients who are candidates for respective epilepsy surge...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rapport, Frances, Shih, Patti, Mitchell, Rebecca, Nikpour, Armin, Bleasel, Andrew, Herkes, Geoffrey, Vagholkar, Sanjyot, Mumford, Virginia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5724135/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28827267
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017148
_version_ 1783285306077741056
author Rapport, Frances
Shih, Patti
Mitchell, Rebecca
Nikpour, Armin
Bleasel, Andrew
Herkes, Geoffrey
Vagholkar, Sanjyot
Mumford, Virginia
author_facet Rapport, Frances
Shih, Patti
Mitchell, Rebecca
Nikpour, Armin
Bleasel, Andrew
Herkes, Geoffrey
Vagholkar, Sanjyot
Mumford, Virginia
author_sort Rapport, Frances
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: One-third of patients with refractory epilepsy may be candidates for resective surgery, which can lead to positive clinical outcomes if efficiently managed. In Australia, there is currently between a 6-month and 2-year delay for patients who are candidates for respective epilepsy surgery from the point of referral for surgical assessment to the eventual surgical intervention. This is a major challenge for implementation of effective treatment for individuals who could potentially benefit from surgery. This study examines implications of delays following the point of eligibility for surgery, in the assessment and treatment of patients, and the factors causing treatment delays. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Mixed methods design: Observations of qualitative consultations, patient and healthcare professional interviews, and health-related quality of life assessments for a group of 10 patients and six healthcare professionals (group 1); quantitative retrospective medical records’ reviews examining longitudinal outcomes for 50 patients assessed for, or undergoing, resective surgery between 2014 and 2016 (group 2); retrospective epidemiological study of all individuals hospitalised with a diagnosis of epilepsy in New South Wales (NSW) in the last 5 years (2012–2016; approximately 11 000 hospitalisations per year, total 55 000), examining health services’ use and treatment for individuals with epilepsy, including refractory surgery outcomes (group 3). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the North Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/17/HAWKE/22) and the NSW Population & Health Services Research Ethics Committee (HREC/16/CIPHS/1). Results will be disseminated through publications, reports and conference presentations to patients and families, health professionals and researchers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5724135
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57241352017-12-19 Better evidence for earlier assessment and surgical intervention for refractory epilepsy (The BEST study): a mixed methods study protocol Rapport, Frances Shih, Patti Mitchell, Rebecca Nikpour, Armin Bleasel, Andrew Herkes, Geoffrey Vagholkar, Sanjyot Mumford, Virginia BMJ Open Health Services Research INTRODUCTION: One-third of patients with refractory epilepsy may be candidates for resective surgery, which can lead to positive clinical outcomes if efficiently managed. In Australia, there is currently between a 6-month and 2-year delay for patients who are candidates for respective epilepsy surgery from the point of referral for surgical assessment to the eventual surgical intervention. This is a major challenge for implementation of effective treatment for individuals who could potentially benefit from surgery. This study examines implications of delays following the point of eligibility for surgery, in the assessment and treatment of patients, and the factors causing treatment delays. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Mixed methods design: Observations of qualitative consultations, patient and healthcare professional interviews, and health-related quality of life assessments for a group of 10 patients and six healthcare professionals (group 1); quantitative retrospective medical records’ reviews examining longitudinal outcomes for 50 patients assessed for, or undergoing, resective surgery between 2014 and 2016 (group 2); retrospective epidemiological study of all individuals hospitalised with a diagnosis of epilepsy in New South Wales (NSW) in the last 5 years (2012–2016; approximately 11 000 hospitalisations per year, total 55 000), examining health services’ use and treatment for individuals with epilepsy, including refractory surgery outcomes (group 3). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the North Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/17/HAWKE/22) and the NSW Population & Health Services Research Ethics Committee (HREC/16/CIPHS/1). Results will be disseminated through publications, reports and conference presentations to patients and families, health professionals and researchers. BMJ Publishing Group 2017-08-21 /pmc/articles/PMC5724135/ /pubmed/28827267 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017148 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Health Services Research
Rapport, Frances
Shih, Patti
Mitchell, Rebecca
Nikpour, Armin
Bleasel, Andrew
Herkes, Geoffrey
Vagholkar, Sanjyot
Mumford, Virginia
Better evidence for earlier assessment and surgical intervention for refractory epilepsy (The BEST study): a mixed methods study protocol
title Better evidence for earlier assessment and surgical intervention for refractory epilepsy (The BEST study): a mixed methods study protocol
title_full Better evidence for earlier assessment and surgical intervention for refractory epilepsy (The BEST study): a mixed methods study protocol
title_fullStr Better evidence for earlier assessment and surgical intervention for refractory epilepsy (The BEST study): a mixed methods study protocol
title_full_unstemmed Better evidence for earlier assessment and surgical intervention for refractory epilepsy (The BEST study): a mixed methods study protocol
title_short Better evidence for earlier assessment and surgical intervention for refractory epilepsy (The BEST study): a mixed methods study protocol
title_sort better evidence for earlier assessment and surgical intervention for refractory epilepsy (the best study): a mixed methods study protocol
topic Health Services Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5724135/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28827267
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017148
work_keys_str_mv AT rapportfrances betterevidenceforearlierassessmentandsurgicalinterventionforrefractoryepilepsythebeststudyamixedmethodsstudyprotocol
AT shihpatti betterevidenceforearlierassessmentandsurgicalinterventionforrefractoryepilepsythebeststudyamixedmethodsstudyprotocol
AT mitchellrebecca betterevidenceforearlierassessmentandsurgicalinterventionforrefractoryepilepsythebeststudyamixedmethodsstudyprotocol
AT nikpourarmin betterevidenceforearlierassessmentandsurgicalinterventionforrefractoryepilepsythebeststudyamixedmethodsstudyprotocol
AT bleaselandrew betterevidenceforearlierassessmentandsurgicalinterventionforrefractoryepilepsythebeststudyamixedmethodsstudyprotocol
AT herkesgeoffrey betterevidenceforearlierassessmentandsurgicalinterventionforrefractoryepilepsythebeststudyamixedmethodsstudyprotocol
AT vagholkarsanjyot betterevidenceforearlierassessmentandsurgicalinterventionforrefractoryepilepsythebeststudyamixedmethodsstudyprotocol
AT mumfordvirginia betterevidenceforearlierassessmentandsurgicalinterventionforrefractoryepilepsythebeststudyamixedmethodsstudyprotocol