Cargando…

A screening questionnaire for generalized tonic‐clonic seizures: Hospital‐based validation vs field‐validation method

The majority of the screening questionnaires for epilepsy have been validated in hospital settings. We previously developed and used for field validation a screening tool to detect generalized tonic‐clonic seizures (GTCS) in the rural communities of the Chaco region of Bolivia. The objective of the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Giuliano, Loretta, Cicero, Calogero Edoardo, Crespo Gómez, Elizabeth Blanca, Sofia, Vito, Zappia, Mario, Nicoletti, Alessandra
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6546018/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31168502
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/epi4.12315
_version_ 1783423485963403264
author Giuliano, Loretta
Cicero, Calogero Edoardo
Crespo Gómez, Elizabeth Blanca
Sofia, Vito
Zappia, Mario
Nicoletti, Alessandra
author_facet Giuliano, Loretta
Cicero, Calogero Edoardo
Crespo Gómez, Elizabeth Blanca
Sofia, Vito
Zappia, Mario
Nicoletti, Alessandra
author_sort Giuliano, Loretta
collection PubMed
description The majority of the screening questionnaires for epilepsy have been validated in hospital settings. We previously developed and used for field validation a screening tool to detect generalized tonic‐clonic seizures (GTCS) in the rural communities of the Chaco region of Bolivia. The objective of the present study was to perform a hospital‐based validation of the same questionnaire and to compare the levels of accuracy obtained when validated in the field or in a hospital‐based context. We carried out a hospital‐based validation in the Hospital Hernandez Vera of Santa Cruz, Bolivia, where we enrolled patients affected by epilepsy with GTCS and controls. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) were calculated. One hundred twenty questionnaires were administered to 59 patients (27 men [45.8%]; mean age ± SD = 32.4 ± 14.2 years) and 61 controls (27 men [44.3%]; mean age ± SD = 32.6 ± 14.3 years). We obtained levels of accuracy of 100%. Sensitivity and PPV were significantly higher than the estimates obtained in the field‐validation study (sensitivity 100% vs 76.3%; PPV 100% vs 69.0%). Our screening questionnaire showed a significantly lower level of sensitivity when validated in the field, confirming that hospital‐based validation can lead to an overestimation of sensitivity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6546018
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65460182019-06-05 A screening questionnaire for generalized tonic‐clonic seizures: Hospital‐based validation vs field‐validation method Giuliano, Loretta Cicero, Calogero Edoardo Crespo Gómez, Elizabeth Blanca Sofia, Vito Zappia, Mario Nicoletti, Alessandra Epilepsia Open Short Research Article The majority of the screening questionnaires for epilepsy have been validated in hospital settings. We previously developed and used for field validation a screening tool to detect generalized tonic‐clonic seizures (GTCS) in the rural communities of the Chaco region of Bolivia. The objective of the present study was to perform a hospital‐based validation of the same questionnaire and to compare the levels of accuracy obtained when validated in the field or in a hospital‐based context. We carried out a hospital‐based validation in the Hospital Hernandez Vera of Santa Cruz, Bolivia, where we enrolled patients affected by epilepsy with GTCS and controls. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) were calculated. One hundred twenty questionnaires were administered to 59 patients (27 men [45.8%]; mean age ± SD = 32.4 ± 14.2 years) and 61 controls (27 men [44.3%]; mean age ± SD = 32.6 ± 14.3 years). We obtained levels of accuracy of 100%. Sensitivity and PPV were significantly higher than the estimates obtained in the field‐validation study (sensitivity 100% vs 76.3%; PPV 100% vs 69.0%). Our screening questionnaire showed a significantly lower level of sensitivity when validated in the field, confirming that hospital‐based validation can lead to an overestimation of sensitivity. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-03-19 /pmc/articles/PMC6546018/ /pubmed/31168502 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/epi4.12315 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Epilepsia Open published by Wiley Periodicals Inc. on behalf of International League Against Epilepsy. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Short Research Article
Giuliano, Loretta
Cicero, Calogero Edoardo
Crespo Gómez, Elizabeth Blanca
Sofia, Vito
Zappia, Mario
Nicoletti, Alessandra
A screening questionnaire for generalized tonic‐clonic seizures: Hospital‐based validation vs field‐validation method
title A screening questionnaire for generalized tonic‐clonic seizures: Hospital‐based validation vs field‐validation method
title_full A screening questionnaire for generalized tonic‐clonic seizures: Hospital‐based validation vs field‐validation method
title_fullStr A screening questionnaire for generalized tonic‐clonic seizures: Hospital‐based validation vs field‐validation method
title_full_unstemmed A screening questionnaire for generalized tonic‐clonic seizures: Hospital‐based validation vs field‐validation method
title_short A screening questionnaire for generalized tonic‐clonic seizures: Hospital‐based validation vs field‐validation method
title_sort screening questionnaire for generalized tonic‐clonic seizures: hospital‐based validation vs field‐validation method
topic Short Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6546018/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31168502
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/epi4.12315
work_keys_str_mv AT giulianoloretta ascreeningquestionnaireforgeneralizedtonicclonicseizureshospitalbasedvalidationvsfieldvalidationmethod
AT cicerocalogeroedoardo ascreeningquestionnaireforgeneralizedtonicclonicseizureshospitalbasedvalidationvsfieldvalidationmethod
AT crespogomezelizabethblanca ascreeningquestionnaireforgeneralizedtonicclonicseizureshospitalbasedvalidationvsfieldvalidationmethod
AT sofiavito ascreeningquestionnaireforgeneralizedtonicclonicseizureshospitalbasedvalidationvsfieldvalidationmethod
AT zappiamario ascreeningquestionnaireforgeneralizedtonicclonicseizureshospitalbasedvalidationvsfieldvalidationmethod
AT nicolettialessandra ascreeningquestionnaireforgeneralizedtonicclonicseizureshospitalbasedvalidationvsfieldvalidationmethod
AT giulianoloretta screeningquestionnaireforgeneralizedtonicclonicseizureshospitalbasedvalidationvsfieldvalidationmethod
AT cicerocalogeroedoardo screeningquestionnaireforgeneralizedtonicclonicseizureshospitalbasedvalidationvsfieldvalidationmethod
AT crespogomezelizabethblanca screeningquestionnaireforgeneralizedtonicclonicseizureshospitalbasedvalidationvsfieldvalidationmethod
AT sofiavito screeningquestionnaireforgeneralizedtonicclonicseizureshospitalbasedvalidationvsfieldvalidationmethod
AT zappiamario screeningquestionnaireforgeneralizedtonicclonicseizureshospitalbasedvalidationvsfieldvalidationmethod
AT nicolettialessandra screeningquestionnaireforgeneralizedtonicclonicseizureshospitalbasedvalidationvsfieldvalidationmethod