Search

Background and purpose: Some epilepsy syndromes (sleep‐related epilepsies, SREs) have a strong link with sleep. Comorbid sleep disorders are common in patients with SRE and can exert a negative impact on seizure control and quality of life. Our purpose was to define the standard procedures for the diagnostic pathway of patients with possible SRE (scenario 1) and the general management of patients with SRE and comorbidity with sleep disorders (scenario 2). Methods: The project was conducted under the auspices of the European Academy of Neurology, the European Sleep Research Society and the International League Against Epilepsy Europe. The framework entailed the following phases: conception of the clinical scenarios; literature review; statements regarding the standard procedures. For the literature search a stepwise approach starting from systematic reviews to primary studies was applied. Published studies were identified from the National Library of Medicine's MEDLINE database and Cochrane Library. Results: Scenario 1: Despite a low quality of evidence, recommendations on anamnestic evaluation and tools for capturing the event at home or in the laboratory are provided for specific SREs. Scenario 2: Early diagnosis and treatment of sleep disorders (especially respiratory disorders) in patients with SRE are likely to be beneficial for seizure control. Conclusions: Definitive procedures for evaluating patients with SRE are lacking. Advice is provided that could be of help for standardizing and improving the diagnostic approach of specific SREs. The importance of identifying and treating specific sleep disorders for the management and outcome of patients with SRE is underlined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Sleep disorders are highly prevalent in the general population and may be linked in a bidirectional fashion to stroke, which is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality. Aim: Four major scientific societies established a task force of experts in neurology, stroke, respiratory medicine, sleep medicine and methodology to critically evaluate the evidence regarding potential links and the impact of therapy. Materials and methods: Thirteen research questions were evaluated in a systematic literature search using a stepwise hierarchical approach: first, systematic reviews and meta‐analyses; second, primary studies post‐dating the systematic reviews/meta‐analyses. A total of 445 studies were evaluated and 88 were included. Statements were generated regarding current evidence and clinical practice. Results: Severe obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) doubles the risk for incident stroke, especially in young to middle‐aged patients. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) may reduce stroke risk, especially in treatment‐compliant patients. The prevalence of OSA is high in stroke patients and can be assessed by polygraphy. Severe OSA is a risk factor for recurrence of stroke and may be associated with stroke mortality, whilst CPAP may improve stroke outcome. It is not clear if insomnia increases stroke risk, whilst the pharmacotherapy of insomnia may increase it. Periodic limb movements in sleep (PLMS), but not restless limb syndrome (RLS), may be associated with an increased risk of stroke. Preliminary data suggest a high frequency of post‐stroke insomnia and RLS and their association with a less favourable stroke outcome, whilst treatment data are scarce. Discussion/Conclusion: Overall, the evidence base is best for OSA relationship with stroke and supports active diagnosis and therapy. Research gaps remain especially regarding insomnia and RLS/PLMS relationships with stroke. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Narcolepsy is a lifelong disease, manifesting with excessive daytime sleepiness and cataplexy, arising between childhood and young adulthood. The diagnosis is typically made after a long delay that burdens the disease severity. The aim of the project, promoted by the "Associazione Italiana Narcolettici e Ipersonni" is to develop Red Flags to detect symptoms for early referral, targeting non-sleep medicine specialists, general practitioners, and pediatricians.Materials and Methods: A multidisciplinary panel, including patients, public institutions, and representatives of national scientific societies of specialties possibly involved in the diagnostic process of suspected narcolepsy, was convened. The project was accomplished in three phases. Phase 1: Sleep experts shaped clinical pictures of narcolepsy in pediatric and adult patients. On the basis of these pictures, Red Flags were drafted. Phase 2: Representatives of the scientific societies and patients filled in a form to identify barriers to the diagnosis of narcolepsy. Phase 3: The panel produced suggestions for the implementation of Red Flags.Results: Red Flags were produced representing three clinical pictures of narcolepsy in pediatric patients ((1) usual sleep symptoms, (2) unusual sleep symptoms, (3) endocrinological signs) and two in adult patients ((1) usual sleep symptoms, (2) unusual sleep symptoms). Inadequate knowledge of symptoms at onset by medical doctors turned out to be the main reported barrier to diagnosis.Conclusions: This report will hopefully enhance knowledge and awareness of narcolepsy among non-specialists in sleep medicine in order to reduce the diagnostic delay that burdens patients in Italy. Similar initiatives could be promoted across Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We describe the development and clinical validation of a patient self-administered tool assessing the quality of multiple sclerosis diagnosis disclosure. Method: A multiple sclerosis expert panel generated questionnaire items from the Doctor's Interpersonal Skills Questionnaire, literature review, and interviews with neurology inpatients. The resulting 19-item Comunicazione medico-paziente nella Sclerosi Multipla (COSM) was pilot tested/debriefed on seven patients with multiple sclerosis and administered to 80 patients newly diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. The resulting revised 20-item version (COSM-R) was debriefed on five patients with multiple sclerosis, field tested/debriefed on multiple sclerosis patients, and field tested on 105 patients newly diagnosed with multiple sclerosis participating in a clinical trial on an information aid. The hypothesized monofactorial structure of COSM-R section 2 was tested on the latter two groups. Results: The questionnaire was well accepted. Scaling assumptions were satisfactory in terms of score distributions, item-total correlations and internal consistency. Factor analysis confirmed section 2's monofactorial structure, which was also test-retest reliable (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 0.73; 95% CI 0.54-0.85). Section 1 had only fair test-retest reliability (ICC 0.45; 95% CI 0.12-0.69), and three items had 8-21% missed responses. Conclusions: COSM-R is a brief, easy-to-interpret MS-specific questionnaire for use as a health care indicator. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]