Search

At present, there is no internationally accepted set of core outcomes or measurement methods for epilepsy clinical practice. The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) convened an international working group of experts in epilepsy, people with epilepsy, and their representatives to develop minimum sets of standardized outcomes and outcome measurement methods for clinical practice. Using modified Delphi consensus methods with consecutive rounds of online voting over 12 months, a core set of outcomes and corresponding measurement tool packages to capture the outcomes were identified for infants, children, and adolescents with epilepsy. Consensus methods identified 20 core outcomes. In addition to the outcomes identified for the ICHOM Epilepsy adult standard set, behavioral, motor, and cognitive/language development outcomes were voted as essential for all infants and children with epilepsy. The proposed set of outcomes and measurement methods will facilitate the implementation of the use of patient‐centered outcomes in daily practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

At present, there is no internationally accepted set of core outcomes or measurement methods for epilepsy clinical practice. Therefore, the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) convened an international working group of experts in epilepsy, people with epilepsy and their representatives to develop minimum sets of standardized outcomes and outcomes measurement methods for clinical practice that support patient–clinician decision‐making and quality improvement. Consensus methods identified 20 core outcomes. Measurement tools were recommended based on their evidence of strong clinical measurement properties, feasibility, and cross‐cultural applicability. The essential outcomes included many non‐seizure outcomes: anxiety, depression, suicidality, memory and attention, sleep quality, functional status, and the social impact of epilepsy. The proposed set will facilitate the implementation of the use of patient‐centered outcomes in daily practice, ensuring holistic care. They also encourage harmonization of outcome measurement, and if widely implemented should reduce the heterogeneity of outcome measurement, accelerate comparative research, and facilitate quality improvement efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]