• Clin Neurophysiol · Apr 2018

    Large inter-rater variability on EEG-reactivity is improved by a novel quantitative method.

    • Duez Christophe Henri Valdemar CHV Research Center for Emergency Medicine, Aarhus University and Aarhus University Hospital, Nørrebrogade 44, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. Elec, Mads Qvist Ebbesen, Krisztina Benedek, Martin Fabricius, Mary Doreen Atkins, Sandor Beniczky, Troels W Kjaer, Hans Kirkegaard, and Birger Johnsen.
    • Research Center for Emergency Medicine, Aarhus University and Aarhus University Hospital, Nørrebrogade 44, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. Electronic address: Christophe.duez@gmail.com.
    • Clin Neurophysiol. 2018 Apr 1; 129 (4): 724-730.

    ObjectiveTo assess inter-rater agreement on EEG-reactivity (EEG-R) in comatose patients and compare it with a quantitative method (QEEG-R).MethodsSix 30-s stimulation epochs (noxious, visual and auditory) were performed during EEG on 19 neurosurgical and 11 cardiac arrest patients. Six experts analysed EEGs for reactivity using their habitual methods. QEEG-R was defined as present if ≥2/6 epochs were reactive (stimulation/rest power ratio exceeding noise level). Three-months patient outcome was assessed by the Cerebral Performance Category Score (CPC) dichotomized in good (1-2) or poor (3-5).ResultsAgreement among experts on overall EEG-R varied from 53% to 83% (κ: 0.05-0.64) and reached 100% (κ: 1) between two QEEG-R calculators. For the experts, absence of EEG-R yielded sensitivities for poor outcome between 40-85% and specificities between 20-90%, for QEEG-R sensitivity was 40% (CI: 23-68%) and specificity 100% (CI: 69-100%).ConclusionsThere is a large inter-rater variation among experts on EEG-R assessment in comatose patients. QEEG-R is a promising objective prognostic parameter with low inter-rater variation and a high specificity for prediction of poor outcome.SignificanceClinicians should be cautious when using the traditional, qualitative method, in particular in end-of-life decisions. Implementation of the quantitative method in clinical practice may improve reliability of reactivity assessments.Copyright © 2018 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.