Percepción de la validez del cuestionario Migraine Disability Assessment por una población de pacientes con migraña crónica / Perception of the validity of the Migraine Disability Assessment questionnaire in a population of patients with chronic migraine

Objetivos: El cuestionario Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) es el instrumento más empleado para valorar el grado de discapacidad en los estudios de migraña. El objetivo del estudio es determinar el nivel de cumplimentación del cuestionario, valorar su facilidad de uso y conocer la percepción subjetiva del paciente sobre la capacidad del cuestionario para medir realmente su discapacidad.Material y métodosEstudio prospectivo sobre una población de 78 pacientes con migraña crónica. Se determina el nivel educativo y la situación laboral. En la visita basal se adiestra a los pacientes sobre la correcta cumplimentación del cuestionario. A los 3 meses se determina la puntuación total y el nivel de cumplimentación. Además los pacientes contestan una encuesta que mide: facilidad de uso y percepción del paciente sobre si la escala refleja su propia discapacidad.ResultadosSolo el 46% rellena completamente el cuestionario. El 69% de los pacientes indica que el cuestionario no les resulta fácil de cumplimentar (resultado no influido por el nivel educativo, pero sí por la situación laboral de los pacientes). El 62% de los encuestados opina que el cuestionario no refleja completamente su propia percepción de discapacidad.ConclusionesAunque está más que demostrada la validez y consistencia del cuestionario MIDAS, un porcentaje elevado de nuestra población reconoce que el cuestionario no es fácil de rellenar y además es percibido por muchos de nuestros pacientes como un cuestionario que no refleja adecuadamente su discapacidad. Conocer la opinión de los pacientes sobre la idoneidad de los cuestionarios administrados en las consultas es crucial para mejorar su cumplimentación. (AU)

Objectives: The Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire is the most frequently used instrument for assessing the level of disability in studies into migraine. This study aims to determine the level of completion of the questionnaire, assess the ease of use, and understand patients’ subjective perception of the questionnaire's actual ability to measure disability.Material and methodsWe performed a prospective study of a sample of 78 patients with chronic migraine, determining their level of education and employment status. In a baseline visit, patients were trained to properly complete the questionnaire. At 3 months, we determined the total score and level of completion. Patients also completed a survey measuring ease of use of the questionnaire and patients’ perception of whether the score accurately reflected their disability.ResultsOnly 46% of patients fully completed the questionnaire. Sixty-nine percent reported finding it difficult to complete (this was influenced by patient's employment status but not by educational level). Sixty-two percent of respondents believed that the questionnaire did not fully reflect their own perception of their disability.ConclusionsAlthough the validity and consistence of the MIDAS questionnaire are well documented, a high percentage of the study population reported finding it difficult to complete; many patients also considered that the questionnaire did not accurately reflect their disability. Understanding patients’ opinions of the suitability of questionnaires used in consultation is crucial to improving completion. (AU)

Perception of the validity of the Migraine Disability Assessment questionnaire in a population of patients with chronic migraine.

OBJECTIVES: The Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire is the most frequently used instrument for assessing the level of disability in studies into migraine. This study aims to determine the level of completion of the questionnaire, assess the ease of use, and understand patients' subjective perception of the questionnaire's actual ability to measure disability. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a prospective study of a sample of 78 patients with chronic migraine, determining their level of education and employment status. In a baseline visit, patients were trained to properly complete the questionnaire. At 3 months, we determined the total score and level of completion. Patients also completed a survey measuring ease of use of the questionnaire and patients' perception of whether the score accurately reflected their disability. RESULTS: Only 46% of patients fully completed the questionnaire. Sixty-nine percent reported finding it difficult to complete (this was influenced by patient's employment status but not by educational level). Sixty-two percent of respondents believed that the questionnaire did not fully reflect their own perception of their disability. CONCLUSIONS: Although the validity and consistence of the MIDAS questionnaire are well documented, a high percentage of the study population reported finding it difficult to complete; many patients also considered that the questionnaire did not accurately reflect their disability. Understanding patients' opinions of the suitability of questionnaires used in consultation is crucial to improving completion.

[Alzemon: a prospective follow-up study of eslicarbazepine acetate monotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy]. / Alzemon: estudio de seguimiento prospectivo del acetato de eslicarbacepina en monoterapia en pacientes con epilepsia de diagnóstico reciente.

INTRODUCTION: Eslicarbazepine acetate is a novel sodium channel blocker for use in the treatment of focal onset seizures. Prospective studies on its effectiveness in monotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed partial epilepsy in routine clinical practice are scarce. AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of eslicarbazepine as initial monotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed partial epilepsy in routine clinical practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective, multicentre, post-authorisation study. Patients with newly diagnosed partial epilepsy aged 18 years or older without previous treatment were included. The efficacy variables were: percentage of seizure-free patients, responders and reduction in monthly frequency of seizures. The safety variables analyse the 12-month retention rate and the occurrence of adverse effects. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were included. The retention rate was 77.4%. At the end of the observation period, 83% of patients were seizure-free and 92.5% had reduced their baseline frequency by 50% or more. In addition, 68% of the patients reported some adverse effect and 7.5% of them dropped out of the study for this reason. The effectiveness analysis of the subgroup of patients aged 65 years or more showed no differences with respect to the overall population. CONCLUSION: Eslicarbazepine monotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed partial epilepsy, both in the general population and in the population over 65 years old, is effective and safe in routine clinical practice.

TITLE: Alzemon: estudio de seguimiento prospectivo del acetato de eslicarbacepina en monoterapia en pacientes con epilepsia de diagnóstico reciente.Introducción. El acetato de eslicarbacepina es un nuevo bloqueante de los canales de sodio en el tratamiento de las crisis de inicio focal. Los estudios prospectivos sobre su efectividad en monoterapia en pacientes con epilepsia parcial de reciente diagnóstico en la práctica clínica habitual son escasos. Objetivo. Evaluar la efectividad de la eslicarbacepina en monoterapia de inicio en pacientes con epilepsia parcial de reciente diagnóstico en la práctica clínica habitual. Pacientes y métodos. Estudio postautorización prospectivo y multicéntrico. Se incluyó a pacientes con epilepsia parcial de reciente diagnóstico de 18 años o más sin tratamiento previo. Las variables de eficacia fueron: porcentaje de pacientes libres de crisis, respondedores y reducción en la frecuencia mensual de crisis. Las variables de seguridad analizan la tasa de retención a los 12 meses y la aparición de efectos adversos. Resultados. Se incluyó a 53 pacientes. La tasa de retención fue del 77,4%. Al final del período de observación, el 83% de los pacientes se encontraba libre de crisis y el 92,5% había reducido en un 50% o más su frecuencia basal. El 68% de los pacientes notificó algún efecto adverso y el 7,5% de ellos abandonó el estudio por este motivo. El análisis de efectividad del subgrupo de 65 años o más no mostró diferencias respecto a la población global. Conclusión. La eslicarbacepina en monoterapia en pacientes con epilepsia parcial de reciente diagnóstico, tanto en la población general como en la población de más de 65 años, es eficaz y segura en la práctica clínica habitual.

Alzemon: estudio de seguimiento prospectivo del acetato de eslicarbacepina en monoterapia en pacientes con epilepsia de diagnóstico reciente / Alzemon: a prospective follow-up study of eslicarbazepine acetate monotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy

Introducción: El acetato de eslicarbacepina es un nuevo bloqueante de los canales de sodio en el tratamiento de las crisis de inicio focal. Los estudios prospectivos sobre su efectividad en monoterapia en pacientes con epilepsia parcia l de reciente diagnóstico en la práctica clínica habitual son escasos.Objetivo: Evaluar la efectividad de la eslicarbacepina en monoterapia de inicio en pacientes con epilepsia parcial de reciente diagnóstico en la práctica clínica habitual.Pacientes y métodos: Estudio postautorización prospectivo y multicéntrico. Se incluyó a pacientes con epilepsia parcial de reciente diagnóstico de 18 años o más sin tratamiento previo. Las variables de eficacia fueron: porcentaje de pacientes libres de crisis, respondedores y reducción en la frecuencia mensual de crisis. Las variables de seguridad analizan la tasa de retención a los 12 meses y la aparición de efectos adversos.Resultados: Se incluyó a 53 pacientes. La tasa de retención fue del 77,4%. Al final del período de observación, el 83% de los pacientes se encontraba libre de crisis y el 92,5% había reducido en un 50% o más su frecuencia basal. El 68% de los pacientes notificó algún efecto adverso y el 7,5% de ellos abandonó el estudio por este motivo. El análisis de efectividad del subgrupo de 65 años o más no mostró diferencias respecto a la población global.Conclusión: La eslicarbacepina en monoterapia en pacientes con epilepsia parcial de reciente diagnóstico, tanto en la población general como en la población de más de 65 años, es eficaz y segura en la práctica clínica habitual.(AU)

Introduction: Eslicarbazepine acetate is a novel sodium channel blocker for use in the treatment of focal onset seizures. Prospective studies on its effectiveness in monotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed partial epilepsy in routine clinical practice are scarce. Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness of eslicarbazepine as initial monotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed partial epilepsy in routine clinical practice. Patients and methods: A prospective, multicentre, post-authorisation study. Patients with newly diagnosed partial epilepsy aged 18 years or older without previous treatment were included. The efficacy variables were: percentage of seizure-free patients, responders and reduction in monthly frequency of seizures. The safety variables analyse the 12-month retention rate and the occurrence of adverse effects. Results: Fifty-three patients were included. The retention rate was 77.4%. At the end of the observation period, 83% of patients were seizure-free and 92.5% had reduced their baseline frequency by 50% or more. In addition, 68% of the patients reported some adverse effect and 7.5% of them dropped out of the study for this reason. The effectiveness analysis of the subgroup of patients aged 65 years or more showed no differences with respect to the overall population. Conclusion: Eslicarbazepine monotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed partial epilepsy, both in the general population and in the population over 65 years old, is effective and safe in routine clinical practice.(AU)

Reversible Homonymous Inferior Quadrantanopia in a Nonketotic Hyperglycemic Patient.

Homonymous hemianopia is frequently associated with retrochiasmal lesions. Vascular etiology is the most common and usually evident on magnetic resonance imaging. When the results of neuroimaging are normal, there are other etiologies that we should consider, like nonketotic hyperglycemia (NKH). We report a 62-year-old female diabetic patient with headache, colour vision and sudden homonymous inferior quadrantanopia and elevated blood sugar levels with normal pH. The neuroimaging was normal and the visual lost improved after the correction of the hyperglycemia. NKH should be considered in patients with sudden and transient hemianopia and normal neuroimaging.

Perception of the validity of the Migraine Disability Assessment questionnaire in a population of patients with chronic migraine. / Percepción de la validez del cuestionario Migraine Disability Assessment por una población de pacientes con migraña crónica.

OBJECTIVES: The Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire is the most frequently used instrument for assessing the level of disability in studies into migraine. This study aims to determine the level of completion of the questionnaire, assess the ease of use, and understand patients' subjective perception of the questionnaire's actual ability to measure disability. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a prospective study of a sample of 78 patients with chronic migraine, determining their level of education and employment status. In a baseline visit, patients were trained to properly complete the questionnaire. At 3 months, we determined the total score and level of completion. Patients also completed a survey measuring ease of use of the questionnaire and patients' perception of whether the score accurately reflected their disability. RESULTS: Only 46% of patients fully completed the questionnaire. Sixty-nine percent reported finding it difficult to complete (this was influenced by patient's employment status but not by educational level). Sixty-two percent of respondents believed that the questionnaire did not fully reflect their own perception of their disability. CONCLUSIONS: Although the validity and consistence of the MIDAS questionnaire are well documented, a high percentage of the study population reported finding it difficult to complete; many patients also considered that the questionnaire did not accurately reflect their disability. Understanding patients' opinions of the suitability of questionnaires used in consultation is crucial to improving completion.

Linfoma cerebral primario con remisión espontánea / Primary cerebral lymphoma with spontaneous

No disponible

Síndrome radiológico aislado / Radiologically isolated syndrome

No disponible

No disponible

Utilización de levetiracetam intravenoso en un hospital general / The Use of intravenous levetiracetam in a general hospital

Introducción y objetivos. Aunque la vía oral es la forma habitual de administración de los fármacos antiepilépticos, en ciertas ocasiones se requiere la vía parenteral. El levetiracetam es el único de los nuevos fármacos antiepilépticos con posibilidad de administración por vía intravenosa. Se presenta un estudio de utilización de levetiracetam intravenoso en un hospital general, con evaluación de su eficacia y seguridad. Pacientes y métodos. Se analizaron de forma retrospectiva las historias clínicas de todos los pacientes ingresados en el hospital que fueron tratados con levetiracetam intravenoso durante el período de tiempo comprendido entre julio de 2007 y mayo de 2008. Resultados. Un total de 53 pacientes fue tratado con levetiracetam intravenoso. Aproximadamente la mitad de los pacientes (47%) había estado ingresada a cargo del servicio de neurología, seguido del servicio de neurocirugía (21%) y oncología (9%). La edad media fue de 52,2 años (rango: 9-87 años) y el 40% eran mujeres. Las crisis fueron sintomáticas en el 81%, y las etiologías más frecuentes fueron los ictus (40%) y los tumores cerebrales (33%). La presentación clínica más frecuente fueron las crisis epilépticas repetidas (47,2%) y el estado epiléptico (26,4%). Globalmente, el control de las crisis se consiguió en el 87% de los pacientes. No se detectaron efectos adversos graves atribuibles al tratamiento con levetiracetam. Conclusiones. El levetiracetam intravenoso parece ser un fármaco antiepiléptico eficaz y seguro en pacientes hospitalizados, especialmente en aquéllos que presentan comorbilidad asociada y/o plurimedicación (AU)

Introduction and aims. Although antiepileptic drugs are usually administered orally, sometimes they must be given intravenously. Levetiracetam is the only one of the new antiepileptic drugs that can be administered intravenously. In this study we report on the use of intravenous levetiracetam in a general hospital, while also evaluating its effectiveness and safety. Patients and methods. A retrospective analysis was conducted of the medical records of all hospital admissions that were treated with intravenous levetiracetam between July 2007 and May 2008. Results. A total of 53 patients were treated with intravenous levetiracetam. Approximately half the patients (47%) had been admitted to neurology, followed by neurosurgery (21%) and oncology (9%). The mean age was 52.2 years (range: 9-87 years) and 40% were females. Seizures were symptomatic in 81% of cases and the most common aetiologies were strokes (40%) and brain tumours (33%). The most frequent presenting symptoms were repeated epileptic seizures (47.2%) and epileptic status (26.4%). Overall, control of seizures was achieved in 87% of patients. No severe side-effects that could be attributed to levetiracetam therapy were detected. Conclusions. Intravenous levetiracetam seems to be an effective, safe antiepileptic drug in hospitalised patients, and especially so in those who present an associated comorbidity and/or who are on multiple drug therapy (AU)

[The use of intravenous levetiracetam in a general hospital]. / Utilización de levetiracetam intravenoso en un hospital general.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Although antiepileptic drugs are usually administered orally, sometimes they must be given intravenously. Levetiracetam is the only one of the new antiepileptic drugs that can be administered intravenously. In this study we report on the use of intravenous levetiracetam in a general hospital, while also evaluating its effectiveness and safety. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of the medical records of all hospital admissions that were treated with intravenous levetiracetam between July 2007 and May 2008. RESULTS: A total of 53 patients were treated with intravenous levetiracetam. Approximately half the patients (47%) had been admitted to neurology, followed by neurosurgery (21%) and oncology (9%). The mean age was 52.2 years (range: 9-87 years) and 40% were females. Seizures were symptomatic in 81% of cases and the most common aetiologies were strokes (40%) and brain tumours (33%). The most frequent presenting symptoms were repeated epileptic seizures (47.2%) and epileptic status (26.4%). Overall, control of seizures was achieved in 87% of patients. No severe side-effects that could be attributed to levetiracetam therapy were detected. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous levetiracetam seems to be an effective, safe antiepileptic drug in hospitalised patients, and especially so in those who present an associated comorbidity and/or who are on multiple drug therapy.

Trastorno del sueño asociado al tratamiento con rimonabant / Sleep disorders associated with treatment with rimonabant

No disponible