ArticleEpilepsy & behavior reports2025
Utility and safety of epilepsy monitoring unit in an inpatient psychiatric setting in Japan.
Article in Epilepsy & behavior reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An epilepsy monitoring unit (EMU) with long-term video electroencephalographic monitoring (LTVEM) was launched in our psychiatric ward to facilitate close examination of patients with epilepsy and offer hospital experience to psychiatrists unfamiliar with epilepsy care in Japan. This study aimed to examine the usefulness and safety of the EMU in an inpatient psychiatric setting in Japan by retrospectively reviewing the clinical notes of EMU admission cases in the psychiatric ward of the University of Tokyo Hospital between August 2014 and March 2020. The usefulness of the EMU was evaluated in terms of 1) habitual seizure recordings, 2) change in diagnosis, 3) frequency of epileptic seizures, and 4) surgical cases after EMU admission, and 5) EMU safety. Habitual events were recorded during LTVEM in 69 % of patients. The diagnosis was changed post-EMU evaluation in 28 % of the patients admitted for differential diagnosis. Among 41 patients who received anti-seizure medications, seizure frequency improved in 22 (53 %), whereas 10 (24 %) became seizure-free, and seizures were reduced by >50 % in 12 (29 %). Eleven patients eventually underwent surgery for epilepsy. Among the total 134 patients, 13 (10 %) experienced adverse events during EMU stay and 6 experienced falls, but none required prolonged hospitalization. Furthermore, three patients had panic attacks, but no post-ictal psychiatric symptoms were observed. Admission to an EMU in the psychiatric setting can facilitate accurate diagnosis and improve epilepsy management. Fall prevention measures should be implemented during and after LTVEM for safer EMU evaluations.
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.