Self-management of Epilepsy A Systematic Review

Matthew W. Luedke, Dan V. Blalock, Karen M. Goldstein, Andrzej S. Kosinski, Saurabh R. Sinha, Connor Drake, Jeffrey D. Lewis, Aatif M. Husain, Allison A. Lewinski, Abigail Shapiro, Jennifer M. Gierisch, Tung T. Tran, Adelaide M. Gordon, Megan G. Van Noord, Hayden B. Bosworth, John W. Williams

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Although self-management is recommended for persons with epilepsy, its optimal strategies and effects are uncertain. Purpose: To evaluate the components and efficacy of selfmanagement interventions in the treatment of epilepsy in community-dwelling persons. Data Sources: English-language searches of MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, and CINAHL in April 2018; the MEDLINE search was updated in March 2019. Study Selection: Randomized and nonrandomized comparative studies of self-management interventions for adults with epilepsy. Data Extraction: An investigator assessed study characteristics; intervention details, including 6 components of selfmanagement; and outcomes, which were verified by a second reviewer. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed independently by 2 investigators. Data Synthesis: 13 randomized and 2 nonrandomized studies (2514 patients) evaluated self-management interventions. Interventions were delivered primarily in group settings, used a median of 4 components, and followed 2 general strategies: 1 based on education and the other on psychosocial therapy. Education-based approaches improved self-management behaviors (standardized mean difference, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.0 to 1.04]), and psychosocial therapy–based approaches improved quality of life (mean difference, 6.64 [CI, 2.51 to 10.77]). Overall, self-management interventions did not reduce seizure rates, but 1 educational intervention decreased a composite of seizures, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. Limitation: High ROB in most studies, incomplete intervention descriptions, and studies limited to English-language publications. Conclusion: There is limited evidence that self-management strategies modestly improve some patient outcomes that are important to persons with epilepsy. Overall, self-management research in epilepsy is limited by the range of interventions tested, the small number of studies using self-monitoring technology, and uncertainty about components and strategies associated with benefit.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)117-126
Number of pages10
JournalAnnals of internal medicine
Volume171
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 16 2019

Fingerprint

Self Care
Epilepsy
MEDLINE
Seizures
Language
Research Personnel
Independent Living
Education
Information Storage and Retrieval
Uncertainty
Publications
Hospital Emergency Service
Hospitalization
Quality of Life
Technology
Therapeutics
Research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

Luedke, M. W., Blalock, D. V., Goldstein, K. M., Kosinski, A. S., Sinha, S. R., Drake, C., ... Williams, J. W. (2019). Self-management of Epilepsy A Systematic Review. Annals of internal medicine, 171(2), 117-126. https://doi.org/10.7326/M19-0458

Self-management of Epilepsy A Systematic Review. / Luedke, Matthew W.; Blalock, Dan V.; Goldstein, Karen M.; Kosinski, Andrzej S.; Sinha, Saurabh R.; Drake, Connor; Lewis, Jeffrey D.; Husain, Aatif M.; Lewinski, Allison A.; Shapiro, Abigail; Gierisch, Jennifer M.; Tran, Tung T.; Gordon, Adelaide M.; Van Noord, Megan G.; Bosworth, Hayden B.; Williams, John W.

In: Annals of internal medicine, Vol. 171, No. 2, 16.07.2019, p. 117-126.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Luedke, MW, Blalock, DV, Goldstein, KM, Kosinski, AS, Sinha, SR, Drake, C, Lewis, JD, Husain, AM, Lewinski, AA, Shapiro, A, Gierisch, JM, Tran, TT, Gordon, AM, Van Noord, MG, Bosworth, HB & Williams, JW 2019, 'Self-management of Epilepsy A Systematic Review', Annals of internal medicine, vol. 171, no. 2, pp. 117-126. https://doi.org/10.7326/M19-0458
Luedke MW, Blalock DV, Goldstein KM, Kosinski AS, Sinha SR, Drake C et al. Self-management of Epilepsy A Systematic Review. Annals of internal medicine. 2019 Jul 16;171(2):117-126. https://doi.org/10.7326/M19-0458
Luedke, Matthew W. ; Blalock, Dan V. ; Goldstein, Karen M. ; Kosinski, Andrzej S. ; Sinha, Saurabh R. ; Drake, Connor ; Lewis, Jeffrey D. ; Husain, Aatif M. ; Lewinski, Allison A. ; Shapiro, Abigail ; Gierisch, Jennifer M. ; Tran, Tung T. ; Gordon, Adelaide M. ; Van Noord, Megan G. ; Bosworth, Hayden B. ; Williams, John W. / Self-management of Epilepsy A Systematic Review. In: Annals of internal medicine. 2019 ; Vol. 171, No. 2. pp. 117-126.
@article{ea2f3d1a201e4f28aabbbdcf0433ad88,
title = "Self-management of Epilepsy A Systematic Review",
abstract = "Background: Although self-management is recommended for persons with epilepsy, its optimal strategies and effects are uncertain. Purpose: To evaluate the components and efficacy of selfmanagement interventions in the treatment of epilepsy in community-dwelling persons. Data Sources: English-language searches of MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, and CINAHL in April 2018; the MEDLINE search was updated in March 2019. Study Selection: Randomized and nonrandomized comparative studies of self-management interventions for adults with epilepsy. Data Extraction: An investigator assessed study characteristics; intervention details, including 6 components of selfmanagement; and outcomes, which were verified by a second reviewer. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed independently by 2 investigators. Data Synthesis: 13 randomized and 2 nonrandomized studies (2514 patients) evaluated self-management interventions. Interventions were delivered primarily in group settings, used a median of 4 components, and followed 2 general strategies: 1 based on education and the other on psychosocial therapy. Education-based approaches improved self-management behaviors (standardized mean difference, 0.52 [95{\%} CI, 0.0 to 1.04]), and psychosocial therapy–based approaches improved quality of life (mean difference, 6.64 [CI, 2.51 to 10.77]). Overall, self-management interventions did not reduce seizure rates, but 1 educational intervention decreased a composite of seizures, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. Limitation: High ROB in most studies, incomplete intervention descriptions, and studies limited to English-language publications. Conclusion: There is limited evidence that self-management strategies modestly improve some patient outcomes that are important to persons with epilepsy. Overall, self-management research in epilepsy is limited by the range of interventions tested, the small number of studies using self-monitoring technology, and uncertainty about components and strategies associated with benefit.",
author = "Luedke, {Matthew W.} and Blalock, {Dan V.} and Goldstein, {Karen M.} and Kosinski, {Andrzej S.} and Sinha, {Saurabh R.} and Connor Drake and Lewis, {Jeffrey D.} and Husain, {Aatif M.} and Lewinski, {Allison A.} and Abigail Shapiro and Gierisch, {Jennifer M.} and Tran, {Tung T.} and Gordon, {Adelaide M.} and {Van Noord}, {Megan G.} and Bosworth, {Hayden B.} and Williams, {John W.}",
year = "2019",
month = "7",
day = "16",
doi = "10.7326/M19-0458",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "171",
pages = "117--126",
journal = "Annals of Internal Medicine",
issn = "0003-4819",
publisher = "American College of Physicians",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Self-management of Epilepsy A Systematic Review

AU - Luedke, Matthew W.

AU - Blalock, Dan V.

AU - Goldstein, Karen M.

AU - Kosinski, Andrzej S.

AU - Sinha, Saurabh R.

AU - Drake, Connor

AU - Lewis, Jeffrey D.

AU - Husain, Aatif M.

AU - Lewinski, Allison A.

AU - Shapiro, Abigail

AU - Gierisch, Jennifer M.

AU - Tran, Tung T.

AU - Gordon, Adelaide M.

AU - Van Noord, Megan G.

AU - Bosworth, Hayden B.

AU - Williams, John W.

PY - 2019/7/16

Y1 - 2019/7/16

N2 - Background: Although self-management is recommended for persons with epilepsy, its optimal strategies and effects are uncertain. Purpose: To evaluate the components and efficacy of selfmanagement interventions in the treatment of epilepsy in community-dwelling persons. Data Sources: English-language searches of MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, and CINAHL in April 2018; the MEDLINE search was updated in March 2019. Study Selection: Randomized and nonrandomized comparative studies of self-management interventions for adults with epilepsy. Data Extraction: An investigator assessed study characteristics; intervention details, including 6 components of selfmanagement; and outcomes, which were verified by a second reviewer. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed independently by 2 investigators. Data Synthesis: 13 randomized and 2 nonrandomized studies (2514 patients) evaluated self-management interventions. Interventions were delivered primarily in group settings, used a median of 4 components, and followed 2 general strategies: 1 based on education and the other on psychosocial therapy. Education-based approaches improved self-management behaviors (standardized mean difference, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.0 to 1.04]), and psychosocial therapy–based approaches improved quality of life (mean difference, 6.64 [CI, 2.51 to 10.77]). Overall, self-management interventions did not reduce seizure rates, but 1 educational intervention decreased a composite of seizures, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. Limitation: High ROB in most studies, incomplete intervention descriptions, and studies limited to English-language publications. Conclusion: There is limited evidence that self-management strategies modestly improve some patient outcomes that are important to persons with epilepsy. Overall, self-management research in epilepsy is limited by the range of interventions tested, the small number of studies using self-monitoring technology, and uncertainty about components and strategies associated with benefit.

AB - Background: Although self-management is recommended for persons with epilepsy, its optimal strategies and effects are uncertain. Purpose: To evaluate the components and efficacy of selfmanagement interventions in the treatment of epilepsy in community-dwelling persons. Data Sources: English-language searches of MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, and CINAHL in April 2018; the MEDLINE search was updated in March 2019. Study Selection: Randomized and nonrandomized comparative studies of self-management interventions for adults with epilepsy. Data Extraction: An investigator assessed study characteristics; intervention details, including 6 components of selfmanagement; and outcomes, which were verified by a second reviewer. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed independently by 2 investigators. Data Synthesis: 13 randomized and 2 nonrandomized studies (2514 patients) evaluated self-management interventions. Interventions were delivered primarily in group settings, used a median of 4 components, and followed 2 general strategies: 1 based on education and the other on psychosocial therapy. Education-based approaches improved self-management behaviors (standardized mean difference, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.0 to 1.04]), and psychosocial therapy–based approaches improved quality of life (mean difference, 6.64 [CI, 2.51 to 10.77]). Overall, self-management interventions did not reduce seizure rates, but 1 educational intervention decreased a composite of seizures, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. Limitation: High ROB in most studies, incomplete intervention descriptions, and studies limited to English-language publications. Conclusion: There is limited evidence that self-management strategies modestly improve some patient outcomes that are important to persons with epilepsy. Overall, self-management research in epilepsy is limited by the range of interventions tested, the small number of studies using self-monitoring technology, and uncertainty about components and strategies associated with benefit.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85072009648&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85072009648&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.7326/M19-0458

DO - 10.7326/M19-0458

M3 - Review article

C2 - 31261386

AN - SCOPUS:85072009648

VL - 171

SP - 117

EP - 126

JO - Annals of Internal Medicine

JF - Annals of Internal Medicine

SN - 0003-4819

IS - 2

ER -