Search

Background The costs and benefits of full lockdown measures are debated. Neurologically impaired children are a vulnerable population with specific needs in terms of protection against infection and access to health services. Objectives We investigated the effects of lockdown on the health of children with neurological disorders and on their access to care during lockdown. Methods Data from 514 children (282 males – 232 females) were collected through physician-administered interviews to investigate: the occurrence of viral-like physical symptoms, the correlation between the risk of developing such symptoms and several demographic and clinical variables, the occurrence of any worsening of the children's neurological conditions during lockdown, and their access to care services during this period. Results 49.1% experienced at least one symptom during the study period, but no child developed severe complications. The prevalence of symptoms was significantly lower during lockdown than during the previous two months. The underlying neurological condition worsened in 11.5% of the patients. Children who regularly left the home during lockdown were greater risk of exhibiting symptoms. During lockdown, 67.7% had a specialist appointment cancelled, 52.6% contacted their paediatrician, and 30.9% contacted their child neuropsychiatrist. Among patients who usually receive rehabilitation, 49.5% continued remotely. Conclusion Lockdown protected children from infections. Telemedicine and telerehabilitation constituted a valid alternative for the care and treatment of these children, but they should not become a widespread and definitive model of care. COVID-19 and other emergency response plans must take into account the specific needs of children with disabilities.

Objective: To describe the clinical, neuropsychological, and psychopathologic features of a cohort of children with a new diagnosis of symptomatic or presumed symptomatic focal epilepsy at time of recruitment and through the first month. The selected population will be followed for 2–5 years after enrollment to investigate the epilepsy course and identify early predictors of drug resistance. Methods: In this observational, multicenter, nationwide study, children (age 1 month–12.9 years) with a new diagnosis of symptomatic or presumed symptomatic focal epilepsy were consecutively enrolled in 15 Italian tertiary childhood epilepsy centers. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) diagnosis of symptomatic focal epilepsy due to acquired and developmental etiologies, and presumed symptomatic focal epilepsy; (2) age at diagnosis older than 1 month and <13 years; and (3) written informed consent. Children were subdivided into three groups: ≤3 years, >3 to 6 years, and >6 years. Clinical, electroencephalography (EEG), neuroimaging, and neuropsychological variables were identified for statistical analyses. Results: Two hundred fifty-nine children were enrolled (116 female and 143 male). Median age: 4.4 years (range 1 month–12.9 years); 46.0% (n = 119) of children were younger than 3 years, 24% (61) from 3 to 6 years of age, and 30% (79) older than 6 years. Neurologic examination findings were normal in 71.8%. Brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was abnormal in 59.9%. Children age ≤3 years experienced the highest seizure frequency in the first month after recruitment (p < 0.0001). Monotherapy in the first month was used in 67.2%. Cognitive tests at baseline revealed abnormal scores in 30%; behavioral problems were present in 21%. At multivariate analysis, higher chances to exhibit more than five seizures in the first month after epilepsy onset was confirmed for younger children and those with temporal lobe epilepsy. Significance: In this prospective cohort study