Assessment of the Predictive Value of Outpatient Smartphone Videos for Diagnosis of Epileptic Seizures
| Autor: | Joseph F. Drazkowski, W. Curt LaFrance, Selim R. Benbadis, Michael A. Gelfand, Robert B. Duckrow, Lawrence J. Hirsch, Andrew S. Blum, David K. Chen, John D. Hixson, William O. Tatum, Gregory D. Cascino, Emily K. Acton |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: |
Adult
Male medicine.medical_specialty Video Recording MEDLINE Physical examination Young Adult 03 medical and health sciences Epilepsy 0302 clinical medicine Seizures Outpatients medicine Humans Psychogenic disease Medical history 030212 general & internal medicine Young adult Medical diagnosis Aged Original Investigation Aged 80 and over medicine.diagnostic_test business.industry Middle Aged medicine.disease Telemedicine Clinical trial Physical therapy Female Smartphone Neurology (clinical) business 030217 neurology & neurosurgery |
| Zdroj: | JAMA Neurol |
| ISSN: | 2168-6149 |
| DOI: | 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.4785 |
| Popis: | Importance Misdiagnosis of epilepsy is common. Video electroencephalogram provides a definitive diagnosis but is impractical for many patients referred for evaluation of epilepsy. Objective To evaluate the accuracy of outpatient smartphone videos in epilepsy. Design, Setting, and Participants This prospective, masked, diagnostic accuracy study (the OSmartViE study) took place between August 31, 2015, and August 31, 2018, at 8 academic epilepsy centers in the United States and included a convenience sample of 44 nonconsecutive outpatients who volunteered a smartphone video during evaluation and subsequently underwent video electroencephalogram monitoring. Three epileptologists uploaded videos for physicians from the 8 epilepsy centers to review. Main Outcomes and Measures Measures of performance (accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value) for smartphone video–based diagnosis by experts and trainees (the index test) were compared with those for history and physical examination and video electroencephalogram monitoring (the reference standard). Results Forty-four eligible epilepsy clinic outpatients (31 women [70.5%]; mean [range] age, 45.1 [20-82] years) submitted smartphone videos (530 total physician reviews). Final video electroencephalogram diagnoses included 11 epileptic seizures, 30 psychogenic nonepileptic attacks, and 3 physiologic nonepileptic events. Expert interpretation of a smartphone video was accurate in predicting a video electroencephalogram monitoring diagnosis of epileptic seizures 89.1% (95% CI, 84.2%-92.9%) of the time, with a specificity of 93.3% (95% CI, 88.3%-96.6%). Resident responses were less accurate for all metrics involving epileptic seizures and psychogenic nonepileptic attacks, despite greater confidence. Motor signs during events increased accuracy. One-fourth of the smartphone videos were correctly diagnosed by 100% of the reviewing physicians, composed solely of psychogenic attacks. When histories and physical examination results were combined with smartphone videos, correct diagnoses rose from 78.6% to 95.2%. The odds of receiving a correct diagnosis were 5.45 times greater using smartphone video alongside patient history and physical examination results than with history and physical examination alone (95% CI, 1.01-54.3;P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance Outpatient smartphone video review by experts has predictive and additive value for diagnosing epileptic seizures. Smartphone videos may reliably aid psychogenic nonepileptic attacks diagnosis for some people. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|