Observational studyEpilepsia2026
Prospective evaluation of a seizure detection wearable device for timely interventions in an epilepsy monitoring unit.
Observational study in Epilepsia, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the real-world performance of a wrist-worn seizure detection device for timely clinical interventions within an epilepsy monitoring unit (EMU).
methodsWe conducted a prospective observational study involving patients admitted to the EMU at a tertiary care center. Participants wore the Embrace2 device, which has US Food and Drug Administration approval for purchase and continuously monitored for convulsive seizures. The device was connected to the hospital's public Wi-Fi and was paired with a smartphone programmed to alert nursing staff through automated messages and phone calls upon seizure detection. Nursing staff were trained on the device's use, and implementation outcomes were documented, including technical performance, alert responses, and staff feedback.
resultsA total of 72 patients (57% female, mean age = 39 years, range = 19-81) were prospectively recruited between April 2024 and June 2025 at the Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal EMU. The analysis included 373 monitoring days (mean = 5.1 days/patient). Eighteen focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (FBTCSs), one generalized tonic-clonic seizure (GTCS), and 510 focal seizures (FSs) occurred. The Embrace2 wrist-worn device detected all 16 FBTCSs/GTCSs that occurred while the device was functioning and worn, but none of 510 FSs. Alerts successfully reached caregivers in 15 of 16 cases, with one failure due to a Wi-Fi disconnection. Seven of the successful alerts occurred during overnight shifts when electroencephalographically trained technicians are typically not on duty. Twenty-nine false alarms occurred (.077/24 h), mostly triggered by routine movements (e.g., toothbrushing). Practical challenges included the potential for missed alerts when nurses were not carrying their phones; however, no seizure events were missed for this reason during the study period. SIGNIFICANCE: Wearable devices show considerable value for seizure detection and triggering timely interventions in EMU settings, particularly during off-hours. However, successful integration requires robust coordination, reliable infrastructure, and staff engagement to maximize clinical benefit and maintain trust in the system.
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.