4.3 Article

Clinical Characteristics and Outcome in Patients With Psychogenic Nonepileptic Seizures

期刊

PSYCHOSOMATIC MEDICINE
卷 72, 期 5, 页码 487-497

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/PSY.0b013e3181d96550

关键词

psychogenic nonepileptic seizures; epilepsy; mental disorder; comorbidity; quality of life

资金

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia [400088]
  2. National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression
  3. Royal Australia
  4. New Zealand College of Psychiatry

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: To examine baseline clinical features of psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES) in a large cohort and to investigate outcome over a period of up to 10 years. Studies investigating PNES have been limited by differences in diagnostic criteria, short follow-up periods, and the use of limited outcome measures. Method: Patients with PNES were identified, using strict diagnostic criteria. Baseline neurological, neuropsychiatric, and neuroimaging data were obtained from medical records. Long-term outcome was assessed with ratings of seizures, psychopathology, and quality of life in a subset of the patients. Results: Patients with PNES (n = 221) experienced long delays in diagnosis (mu, 5.6 years; standard deviation, 7.7 years) and high rates (>60%) of prolonged treatment with antiepileptic drugs. Compared with previous studies, a relatively low proportion (8.1% to 17.9%, depending on diagnostic criteria) had comorbid epilepsy. An unexpected finding was that 22.6% of PNES patients had magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities. Patients assessed at follow-up (n = 61) exhibited poor long-term outcomes with ongoing PNES, high rates of psychopathology, low rates of specialist follow-up, poor quality of life, and poor overall levels of functioning. Conclusions: These results demonstrate the need for earlier diagnosis of PNES and comorbidities and highlight the need for diagnostic and therapeutic approaches that combine neurological and psychiatric perspectives.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据