ArticleEpilepsia2024
Association of first antiseizure medication with acute health care utilization in a cohort of adults with newly diagnosed epilepsy.
Article in Epilepsia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveEpilepsy is primarily treated with antiseizure medications (ASMs). The recommendations for first ASM in newly diagnosed epilepsy are inconsistently followed, and we sought to examine whether nonrecommended first ASM was associated with acute care utilization.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults (≥18 years old) with newly diagnosed epilepsy (identified using validated epilepsy/convulsion International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modification codes) in 2015-2019, sampled from Marketscan's Commercial and Medicare Databases. Exposure of interest was receipt of a non-guideline-recommended ASM, and the primary outcome was acute care utilization (an emergency department visit or hospitalization after the first ASM claim). Descriptive statistics characterized covariates, and multivariable negative binominal regression models were built adjusting for age, sex, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, comorbid neurologic disease (e.g., stroke), and ASM polypharmacy.
resultsApproximately 14 681 people with new epilepsy were prescribed an ASM within 1 year. The three most prescribed medications were levetiracetam (54%, n = 7912), gabapentin (10%, n = 1462), and topiramate (7%, n = 1022). Approximately 4% (n = 648) were prescribed an ASM that should be avoided, and ~74% of people with new epilepsy had an acute care visit during the follow-up period. Mean number of acute care visits during follow-up was 3.34 for "recommended" ASMs and 4.42 for ASMs that "should be avoided." Prescription of a recommended/neutral ASM as compared to an ASM that should be avoided was associated with reduced likelihood of acute care utilization (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = .85, 95% confidence interval [CI] = .77-.94). The recommended/neutral category of ASMs was not statistically significantly associated with seizure- or epilepsy-specific acute care utilization (IRR = .93, 95% CI = .79-1.09). SIGNIFICANCE: Adults with new epilepsy are frequent users of acute care. There remain a proportion of persons with epilepsy prescribed ASMs that guidelines suggest avoiding, and these ASMs are associated with increased likelihood of emergency department visit or hospitalization. These findings reinforce the importance of optimizing the choice of first ASM in epilepsy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.