Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8995853›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners1996

Audit of the care of patients with epilepsy in general practice.

K Redhead, P Tasker, K Suchak, M Ahmed, G Copsey, P Roberts, J Daws, M Titmarsh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Deaths from epilepsy: what next?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002
    Article
  3. The general practitioner with a special interest: new opportunities or the end of the generalist practitioner?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002
    Article
  4. Assessing the psychosocial consequences of epilepsy: a community-based study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1999
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

K Redhead
P Tasker
K Suchak
M Ahmed
G Copsey
P Roberts
J Daws
M Titmarsh

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious studies have shown that there is great potential for improving the management of patients with epilepsy.

aimTo identify all patients with epilepsy, to evaluate and audit their care in relation to an annual review, to document seizure frequency and appropriateness of daily therapy to aid compliance and to propose strategies to improve these and other aspects of epileptic care.

methodAn audit of the care of patients with epilepsy was undertaken in two King's Lynn practices with a combined population of 22,500. Principles for the management of epilepsy were established. From these principles, the following standards were agreed: 75% of patients on treatment for epilepsy should be seen every year, 75% of patients should have their seizure frequency documented, and 75% of patients should take their anti-epileptic drugs no more than twice daily. As a result of the first audit cycle, changes were made in the documentation and advice regarding treatment relating to these standards.

resultsThe first audit cycle showed that 83% of patients had been seen at least once in the previous year, that documentation of seizure frequency existed for 51% of patients in the past year, and that 63% of patients were taking their treatment no more than twice daily. The evaluation was repeated 22 months later and an overall improvement was demonstrated in the first two results: 95% of patients had been seen in the past year, 93% had had their seizure frequency documented; however, only 66% of patients were taking their treatment twice daily or less.

conclusionCall and recall, and documentation of seizure frequency were improved by this clinical audit. However, alterations in daily therapy appeared difficult for a variety of reasons; for example, therapy might have been initiated by a hospital specialist, and patients in a stable condition might have been apprehensive about changes. In order to improve the care of patients with epilepsy, a primary care team approach is desirable within a structure of good specialist services.

Indexed as

Medical AuditAnticonvulsantsDrug Administration ScheduleEnglandEpilepsyFamily PracticeHumansAnticonvulsants

Identifiers

PMID8995853
PMCPMC1239863

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.