Value of the electroencephalogram in the assessment of suspected neuropsychomotor development delay in children with epilepsy

Authors

  • Diego Carrão Winckler Universidade de Passo Fundo
  • Valéria Winkaler Jeremias Universidade de Passo Fundo
  • Lorena Teresinha Consalter Geib Universidade de Passo Fundo
  • Ana Maria Bellani Migott Universidade de Passo Fundo
  • Fernando Luiz Giacomini Universidade de Passo Fundo
  • Magda Lahorgue Nunes Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul; Faculdade de Medicina

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.19964

Keywords:

validity of tests, electroencephalography, child development

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: to evaluate the performance of electroencephalogram (EEG) in the prediction of suspected neuropsychomotor development delay in children under five years old with positive selection for epilepsy. METHOD: A sample of 1687 (73.8%) children of a cohort of live births in 2003 in Passo Fundo / RS has been screened in houses to detect seizures. The identified cases were referred to Neurological Interview for Epilepsy, evaluation of psychomotor development with the Denver II test and EEG examination. It was calculated the sensitivity, specificity and predictive value of EEG, taking as gold standard the clinical evaluation. RESULTS: Of the 541 (32%) children with positive screening, 59 had seizures and 37 were evaluated by both methods (Denver II test and EEG). From this group 69% had altered EEG and 84,8% suspected development delay, with significant association (p <0.03) between the examinations. The sensitivity of the EEG was 69% and specificity of 75%, with PPV of 91%. CONCLUSION: The study showed that the EEG is associated with early diagnosis of changes in neuropsychomotor development, increasing the detection of suspected cases.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2010-08-01

Issue

Vol. 20 No. 2 (2010)

Section

Original Research

License

CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JOURNAL  PUBLISHERS

 

Publishers who are Committee on Publication Ethics members and who support COPE membership for journal editors should:

 

Publishers should:

 

  • Define the relationship between publisher, editor and other parties in a contract
  • Respect privacy (for example, for research participants, for authors, for peer reviewers)
  • Protect intellectual property and copyright
  • Foster editorial independence

 

Publishers should work with journal editors to:

 

  • Set journal policies appropriately and aim to meet those policies, particularly with respect to:

–         Editorial  independence

–         Research ethics, including confidentiality, consent, and the special requirements for human and animal research

–         Authorship

–         Transparency and integrity (for example, conflicts of interest, research funding, reporting standards

–         Peer review and the role of the editorial team beyond that of the journal editor

–         Appeals and complaints

  • Communicate journal policies (for example, to authors, readers, peer reviewers)
  • Review journal policies periodically, particularly with respect to new recommendations from the COPE
  • Code of Conduct for Editors and the COPE Best Practice Guidelines
  • Maintain the integrity of the academic record
  • Assist the parties (for example, institutions, grant funders, governing bodies) responsible for the investigation of suspected research and publication misconduct and, where possible, facilitate in the resolution of these cases
  • Publish corrections, clarifications, and retractions
  • Publish content on a timely basis