Epilepsy & behavior : E&B · 2021
Tolerability of antiseizure medicines using Lithuanian version of the Liverpool Adverse Events Profile.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
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.
Jasionis Arminas, Jasionytė Gabija, Mameniškienė Rūta
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a Lithuanian version of the Liverpool Adverse Events Profile (LT-LAEP), and to evaluate the main demographic, clinical, and pharmacological determinants of its score.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed the LT-LAEP and examined its psychometric properties. People with epilepsy (PWE) were asked to fill in the LT-LAEP, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale-7 (GAD-7), the Neurological Disorders Depression Inventory for Epilepsy (NDDI-E), and a questionnaire addressing key demographic and clinical information. Antiseizure medicine (ASM) burden was expressed as a number of ASM and total drug load. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to determine the influence of various variables on LAEP results.
RESULTS: The data of 157 participants with the established diagnosis of epilepsy and stable ASM regimen were included in the final analysis. The mean LT-LAEP score was 48.72 ± 13.65. High internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.912) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.801) were demonstrated. The most common adverse effects (AEs) were tiredness (24.8%) and memory problems (23.6%). Lithuanian version of the Liverpool Adverse Events Profile score significantly correlated with NDDI-E (r = 0.635, p < 0.001) and GAD-7 (r = 0.640, p < 0.001) scores. The correlation between LT-LAEP score and total drug load was weak (r = 0.243, p = 0.002). The significant predictors of higher LT-LAEP score were female sex (β = -4.768, p = 0.003), higher seizure frequency (β = 4.757, p < 0.001), and higher NDDI-E (β = 1.457, p < 0.001) and GAD-7 scores (β = 0.610, p = 0.007) (F(4,152) = 43.975, R2 = 0.536, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The LT-LAEP is a reliable and valid instrument for the evaluation of the AEs of ASM. A higher score of LT-LAEP is predicted by female sex, seizure frequency, and anxiety and depression levels rather than total drug load.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed the LT-LAEP and examined its psychometric properties. People with epilepsy (PWE) were asked to fill in the LT-LAEP, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale-7 (GAD-7), the Neurological Disorders Depression Inventory for Epilepsy (NDDI-E), and a questionnaire addressing key demographic and clinical information. Antiseizure medicine (ASM) burden was expressed as a number of ASM and total drug load. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to determine the influence of various variables on LAEP results.
RESULTS: The data of 157 participants with the established diagnosis of epilepsy and stable ASM regimen were included in the final analysis. The mean LT-LAEP score was 48.72 ± 13.65. High internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.912) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.801) were demonstrated. The most common adverse effects (AEs) were tiredness (24.8%) and memory problems (23.6%). Lithuanian version of the Liverpool Adverse Events Profile score significantly correlated with NDDI-E (r = 0.635, p < 0.001) and GAD-7 (r = 0.640, p < 0.001) scores. The correlation between LT-LAEP score and total drug load was weak (r = 0.243, p = 0.002). The significant predictors of higher LT-LAEP score were female sex (β = -4.768, p = 0.003), higher seizure frequency (β = 4.757, p < 0.001), and higher NDDI-E (β = 1.457, p < 0.001) and GAD-7 scores (β = 0.610, p = 0.007) (F(4,152) = 43.975, R2 = 0.536, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The LT-LAEP is a reliable and valid instrument for the evaluation of the AEs of ASM. A higher score of LT-LAEP is predicted by female sex, seizure frequency, and anxiety and depression levels rather than total drug load.