首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Archives of Disease in Childhood. Fetal and Neonatal Edition >Non-expert use of the cerebral function monitor for neonatal seizure detection
【2h】

Non-expert use of the cerebral function monitor for neonatal seizure detection

机译:非专业使用脑功能监测仪进行新生儿癫痫发作检测

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Background: The cerebral function monitor (CFM) is widely used to detect neonatal seizures, but there are very few studies comparing it with simultaneous electroencephalography (EEG). >Objective: To determine the accuracy of non-expert use of the CFM and to assess interobserver agreement of CFM seizure detection. >Patients: Babies admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit at King's College Hospital who were at high risk of seizure and had video-EEG monitoring. >Methods: Video-EEG was used to detect seizures. Each baby had CFM recordings at speeds of 6, 15, and 30 cm/h during the EEG. Four neonatologists, trained in CFM seizure recognition, independently rated one hour CFM samples at three speeds from each baby. Interobserver agreement was quantified using Cohen's κ. >Results: CFM traces from 19 babies with EEG seizures and 21 babies without EEG seizures were analysed. Overall non-expert interpretation of the CFM performed poorly as a seizure detector compared with simultaneous EEG (sensitivities 38% at 6 cm/h; 54% at 15 cm/h; 55% at 30 cm/h). Although babies with seizures were more likely to be correctly classified at higher speeds (p = 0.02), babies without seizures were also more likely to be misclassified (p < 0.001). Agreement between observers was not good at any speed (κ values from 0.01 to 0.39). The observers usually detected generalised seizures but often missed seizures that were focal, low amplitude, or lasted less than one minute. >Conclusion: Approximately half of all neonatal seizures may be missed using CFM alone. Neonatal seizures need to be diagnosed, characterised, and quantified first using EEG. The CFM may then be useful for long term monitoring.
机译:>背景:脑功能监测器(CFM)被广泛用于检测新生儿癫痫发作,但很少有人将其与同步脑电图(EEG)进行比较。 >目的:确定非专家使用CFM的准确性,并评估观察员之间对CFM癫痫发作检测的一致性。 >患者:婴儿被送进国王学院医院的新生儿重症监护室,患癫痫的风险很高,并进行了电子心电图监测。 >方法:使用Video-EEG检测癫痫发作。在脑电图期间,每个婴儿的CFM记录速度分别为6、15和30 cm / h。接受过CFM癫痫识别训练的四名新生儿科医生分别以每个婴儿三个速度对一小时的CFM样本进行独立评估。使用Cohenκ量化观察者之间的一致性。 >结果:分析了19例脑电图发作的婴儿和21例脑电图未发作的婴儿的CFM痕迹。与癫痫发作检测器相比,与同时发EEG相比,CFM的总体非专家解释效果不佳(灵敏度在6 cm / h时为38%;在15 cm / h时为54%;在30 cm / h时为55%)。尽管癫痫发作的婴儿更容易以较高的速度正确分类(p = 0.02),但没有癫痫发作的婴儿也更有可能被错误分类(p <0.001)。观察者之间的一致性无论如何都不好(κ值从0.01到0.39)。观察者通常检测到全身性癫痫发作,但常常错过了局灶性,低幅度或持续时间少于一分钟的癫痫发作。 >结论:仅使用CFM可能会错过所有新生儿癫痫发作的大约一半。首先需要使用EEG对新生儿癫痫发作进行诊断,表征和定量。然后,CFM对于长期监视可能很有用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号