Identifying areas for improvement in epilepsy management in developing countries: An experience of neurocooperation in Cameroon.
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION
Epilepsy is especially prevalent in developing countries: incidence and prevalence rates are at least twice as high as in our setting. Epilepsy is also highly stigmatised, and few resources are available for its management.
MATERIAL AND
METHODS
We performed a descriptive observational study in December 2016, distributing a questionnaire on epilepsy management to healthcare professionals from 3 different hospitals in Cameroon. Data are presented as means or percentages.
RESULTS
Thirty-eight healthcare providers participated in the survey; 42.1% were female and mean age was 40.1 years (range, 22-62). Regarding the causes of epilepsy, 68.4% considered it a psychiatric condition, 34.2% a degenerative disease, 28.9% a hereditary condition, and 21.1% secondary to infection. In terms of management, 23.7% considered that thorough clinical history is sufficient to establish a diagnosis. Only 60.5% considered the clinical interview to be important for diagnosis, 52.6% considered EEG to be necessary, and 28.9% considered laboratory analyses to be important. Only 13.2% mentioned neuroimaging. In the treatment of pregnant women, 36.8% recommended folic acid supplementation, 65.8% believed antiepileptic treatment should be maintained, and only 39.5% recommended breastfeeding. Concerning treatment, the participants knew a mean of 2 antiepileptic drugs: phenobarbital was the best known (81.6%), followed by carbamazepine (55.3%) and valproic acid (28.9%).
CONCLUSIONS
There is a need among healthcare professionals for education and information on the disease, its diagnosis, and management options, in order to optimise management and consequently improve patients' quality of life.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.