Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Research Articles

Challenges of status epilepticus management in a resource-limited setting: A review

Status epilepticus (SE) is a life-threatening neurological condition with significant mortality. Rapid management is essential to minimize the mortality and disability of SE. Two recent trials provided evidence to guide SE management in early and established stages. The Rapid Anticonvulsant Medication Prior To Arrival Trial (RAMPART, 2011) showed that intramuscular midazolam is a better alternative for early convulsive SE in prehospital settings. The Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT, 2020) supported the use of sodium valproate and levetiracetam as second-line treatment for its efficacy and shorter administration time. However, there are challenges to revising the status epilepticus management in resource-limited settings, in pre-hospital, first- and second-line treatment, as well as management of refractory and super-refractory SE. These challenges included restrictions or lack of training in the administration of benzodiazepine in the prehospital setting, limited availability and accessibility of newer antiseizure medications (ASMs) in emergency departments and smaller hospitals, and low clinicians’ awareness of the latest evidence. A collaborative effort to educate, improve awareness, and make certain ASMs more readily available is recommended to achieve a better clinical outcome in SE.

Emergent Management of Status Epilepticus.

Status epilepticus is a neurologic emergency that can be life- threatening. The key to effective management is recognition and prompt initiation of treatment. Management of status epilepticus requires a patient-specific-approach framework, consisting of four axes: (1) semiology, (2) etiology, (3) EEG correlate, and (4) age. This article provides a comprehensive overview of status epilepticus, highlighting the current treatment approaches and strategies for management and control. Administering appropriate doses of antiseizure medication in a timely manner is vital for halting seizure activity. Benzodiazepines are the first-line treatment, as demonstrated by three randomized controlled trials in the hospital and prehospital settings. Benzodiazepines can be administered through IV, intramuscular, rectal, or intranasal routes. If seizures persist, second-line treatments such as phenytoin and fosphenytoin, valproate, or levetiracetam are warranted. The recently published Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial found that all three of these drugs are similarly effective in achieving seizure cessation in approximately half of patients. For cases of refractory and super-refractory status epilepticus, IV anesthetics, including ketamine and γ-aminobutyric acid-mediated (GABA-ergic) medications, are necessary. There is an increasing body of evidence supporting the use of ketamine, not only in the early phases of stage 3 status epilepticus but also as a second-line treatment option. As with other neurologic emergencies, "time is brain" when treating status epilepticus. Antiseizure medication should be initiated quickly to achieve seizure cessation. There is a need to explore newer generations of antiseizure medications and nonpharmacologic modalities to treat status epilepticus.

What have we learned from the RAMPART and ESETT randomized controlled trials?

Lessons learned from the Rapid Anticonvulsant Medication Prior to Arrival Trial (RAMPART) and Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT) trials are considered in three ways. First, by asking about the questions the trials were primarily designed to answer, then about the context of the intervention and characteristics of the patients described in secondary analyses, and finally, about what was learned about how to conduct trials in this space. The talk concludes with suggestions and a vision for how to best conduct future trials investigating status epilepticus. This paper was presented at the 8th London-Innsbruck Colloquium on Status Epilepticus and Acute Seizures held in September 2022.

An Emergency Department Quality Improvement Project for Intravenous Levetiracetam Administration

Background: Levetiracetam is a readily available, safe anticonvulsive medication. It is frequently administered as IV piggyback with a pump, carrier fluid, and tubing. The Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial demonstrated levetiracetam being similarly effective to previously used treatments in doses up to 4500 mg administered over 10 minutes. Objective: We sought to compare usage, cost, and waste of IV piggyback with IV push administration of levetiractam following implementation of an IV push protocol in an academic emergency department. Methods: A three-month review of levetiracetam administration was done following protocol implementation using IV push for initial treatment of benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus. The review quantified the number of IV push vs IV piggyback doses for all indications and evaluated cost of supplies necessary for administration. Results: During the study period, 137 patients received 142 doses of IV levetiracetam. Fifty-one doses (36%) were given as IV push rather than IV piggyback. The majority of doses 116 (82%) were 1000-2000 mg and 11 doses (8%) 3500-4500 mg. Estimated three-month savings with complete transition of IV piggyback to IV push would exceed $6000 just in our ED. The amount of sterile solution carrier fluid was also reduced and IV pump time freed. Conclusion: Implementation of an emergency department IV push levetiracetam protocol resulted in cost savings. Opportunities remain to improve clinical implementation practices. Medication administration represents one crucial target area where healthcare systems can implement policies to reduce waste and commit to climate-smart health care.

Treatment of Toxin-Related Status Epilepticus With Levetiracetam, Fosphenytoin, or Valproate in Patients Enrolled in the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial

We describe a subset of patients with toxin-related precipitants of seizures/status epilepticus enrolled in the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT). The ESETT was a prospective, double-blinded, adaptive trial evaluating levetiracetam, valproate, and fosphenytoin as second-line agents in benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus in adults and children. The primary outcome was the absence of seizures and improvement in the level of consciousness 1 hour after study drug administration. In this post hoc analysis, the safety and efficacy of second-line agents in a subset of patients with toxin-related seizures are described. A total of 249 adults and 229 children were enrolled in the ESETT. Toxin-related seizures occurred in 29 (11.6%) adults and 1 child (0.4%). In adults, men were more likely to have toxin-related seizures than women (25 of 145, 17.2% versus 4 of 104, 3.9%). The most common toxin-related precipitants were alcohol withdrawal and cocaine, 11(37%) of 30 patients each. Cocaine was used with other substances by most patients 10 (91%) of 11, most commonly with an opioid 7 (64%) of 11. For alcohol withdrawal-related seizures, treatment successes with levetiracetam, valproate, and fosphenytoin were 3 (100%) of 3, 3 (50%) of 6, and 1 (50%) of 2, respectively. For cocaine-related seizures, treatment success was 1 (14%) of 7 for levetiracetam, 0 (0%) of 1 for valproate, and 1 (33%) of 3 for fosphenytoin. One patient who used cocaine and an opioid received fosphenytoin and developed life-threatening hypotension. In the ESETT, approximately 1 in 10 adult patients with status epilepticus presented with a toxin-related seizure. Alcohol withdrawal and cocaine/opioid use were the most common toxin-related precipitants. Toxin-related benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus was successfully treated with a single dose of second-line antiseizure medication in 42% of the patients.

A critical review of fosphenytoin sodium injection for the treatment of status epilepticus in adults and children

ABSTRACT Introduction Status epilepticus (SE) is a neurological emergency that can occur in patients with or without epilepsy. Rapid treatment is paramount to mitigate risks of neuronal injury, morbidity/mortality, and healthcare-cost burdens associated with SE. Fosphenytoin is the prodrug of phenytoin designed to enable faster administration and improved tolerability as compared to intravenous (IV) phenytoin in the treatment of SE. Areas covered This review evaluates the chemistry, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, safety, and tolerability of fosphenytoin. Efficacy data for fosphenytoin in the treatment of SE in adults and children are analyzed from initial phase I trials in 1988 through current phase III trials, including the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT). Expert opinion IV phenytoin is an established treatment of SE, but its alkaline aqueous vehicle is associated with dermatologic irritation and systemic complications when rapidly infused. The water-soluble nature of its prodrug, fosphenytoin, allows for rapid infusion, and it is rapidly converted to phenytoin when administered intravenously or intramuscularly. In the ESETT, IV fosphenytoin demonstrated similar efficacy in treatment of established SE when compared to IV levetiracetam and IV valproate in adults and children, making it a reasonable choice in the treatment of SE that is unresponsive to benzodiazepines.

Misdiagnosis of prolonged psychogenic non-epileptic seizures as status epilepticus: epidemiology and associated risks

ObjectiveTo determine the epidemiology of prolonged psychogenic non-epileptic seizures (pPNES) misdiagnosed as status epilepticus, as well as the risks associated with non-indicated treatment.MethodsWe performed an individual patient data analysis from...

Efficacy of Home Anticonvulsant Administration for Second-Line Status Epilepticus Treatment

To investigate whether receiving a second-line anticonvulsant medication that is part of a patient's home regimen influences outcomes in benzodiazepine-refractory convulsive status epilepticus. Using the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial data, allocation to a study drug included in the patient's home anticonvulsant medication regimen was compared to receipt of an alternative second-line study medication. The primary outcome was cessation of clinical seizures with improved consciousness by 60 minutes after study drug initiation. Secondary outcomes were seizure cessation adjudicated from medical records and adverse events. We performed inverse probability of treatment-weighted (IPTW) logistic regressions. Of 462 patients, 232 (50%) were taking 1-2 of the 3 study medications at home. The primary outcome was observed in 39/89 (44%) patients allocated to their home medication vs 76/143 (53%) allocated to a nonhome medication (IPTW odds ratio [OR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-1.14). The adjudicated outcome occurred in 37/89 (42%) patients vs 82/143 (57%), respectively (IPTW OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.30-0.89). There was no interaction between study levetiracetam and home levetiracetam and there were no differences in adverse events. There was no difference in the primary outcome for patients who received a home medication vs nonhome medication. However, the retrospective evaluation suggested an association between receiving a nonhome medication and seizure cessation. This study provides Class II evidence that for patients with refractory convulsive status epilepticus, use of a home second-line anticonvulsant compared to a nonhome anticonvulsant did not significantly affect the probability of stopping seizures.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of levetiracetam and phenytoin in the treatment of established status epilepticus: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Status epilepticus (SE) is the second most critical neurological illness after cerebrovascular disease. Phenytoin has traditionally been considered the second-line drug of first choice after failure of first-line treatment using benzodiazepines. In recent years, levetiracetam has been proposed as a potential substitute for phenytoin. To comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of levetiracetam and phenytoin in the treatment of patients with established SE, we integrated the data from 11 eligible studies and conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. The PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched to identify eligible articles reporting outcomes including clinical seizure cessation within 60 min, clinical recurrence rate within 24 h, good final outcome at discharge, and adverse events (AEs) of treatment with levetiracetam and phenytoin. Our study included a total of 11 trials including a total of 1933 patients. The outcomes showed that the pooled Risk Raito (RR) of clinical seizure cessation within 60 min was 1.08 (95% CI = 1.02–1.14, P = 0.01). The pooled RR of clinical recurrence rate within 24 h was 1.03 (95% CI = 0.66–1.59, P = 0.91). The pooled RR of AEs was 0.83 (95% CI = 0.57–1.21, P = 0.34). The pooled RRs of life-threatening hypotension and acute respiratory depression were 0.29 (95% CI = 0.10–0.81, P = 0.02) and 0.63 (95% CI = 0.40–0.98, P = 0.04), respectively. Levetiracetam might be more effective than phenytoin for the treatment of established SE and is associated with a lower incidence of more serious AEs. Levetiracetam can be used as an alternative to phenytoin for the treatment of benzodiazepine-refractory SE.

Early Neurologic Recovery, Practice Pattern Variation, and the Risk of Endotracheal Intubation Following Established Status Epilepticus.

To quantify the association between early neurologic recovery, practice pattern variation, and endotracheal intubation during established status epilepticus, we performed a secondary analysis within the cohort of patients enrolled in the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT). We evaluated factors associated with the endpoint of endotracheal intubation occurring within 120 minutes of ESETT study drug initiation. We defined a blocked, stepwise multivariate regression, examining 4 phases during status epilepticus management: (1) baseline characteristics, (2) acute treatment, (3) 20-minute neurologic recovery, and (4) 60-minute recovery, including seizure cessation and improving responsiveness. Of 478 patients, 117 (24.5%) were intubated within 120 minutes. Among high-enrolling sites, intubation rates ranged from 4% to 32% at pediatric sites and 19% to 39% at adult sites. Baseline characteristics, including seizure precipitant, benzodiazepine dosing, and admission vital signs, provided limited discrimination for predicting intubation (area under the curve [AUC] 0.63). However, treatment at sites with an intubation rate in the highest (vs lowest) quartile strongly predicted endotracheal intubation independently of other treatment variables (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 8.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.08-21.4, model AUC 0.70). Site-specific variation was the factor most strongly associated with endotracheal intubation after adjustment for 20-minute (aOR 23.4, 95% CI 6.99-78.3, model AUC 0.88) and 60-minute (aOR 14.7, 95% CI 3.20-67.5, model AUC 0.98) neurologic recovery. Endotracheal intubation after established status epilepticus is strongly associated with site-specific practice pattern variation, independently of baseline characteristics, and early neurologic recovery and should not alone serve as a clinical trial endpoint in established status epilepticus. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01960075.

Early Exposure of Fosphenytoin, Levetiracetam, and Valproic Acid After High‐Dose Intravenous Administration in Young Children With Benzodiazepine‐Refractory Status Epilepticus

Fosphenytoin (FOS) and its active form, phenytoin (PHT), levetiracetam (LEV), and valproic acid (VPA) are commonly used second-line treatments of status epilepticus. However, limited information is available regarding LEV and VPA concentrations following high intravenous doses, particularly in young children. The Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial, a blinded, comparative effectiveness study of FOS, LEV, and VPA for benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus provided an opportunity to investigate early drug concentrations. Patients aged ≥2 years who continued to seizure despite receiving adequate doses of benzodiazepines were randomly assigned to FOS, LEV, or VPA infused over 10 minutes. A sparse blood-sampling approach was used, with up to 2 samples collected per patient within 2 hours following drug administration. The objective of this work was to report early drug exposure of PHT, LEV, and VPA and plasma protein binding of PHT and VPA. Twenty-seven children with median (interquartile range) age of 4 (2.5-6.5) years were enrolled. The total plasma concentrations ranged from 69 to 151.3 μg/mL for LEV, 11.3 to 26.7 μg/mL for PHT and 126 to 223 μg/mL for VPA. Free fraction ranged from 4% to 19% for PHT and 17% to 51% for VPA. This is the first report in young children of LEV concentrations with convulsive status epilepticus as well as VPA concentrations after a 40 mg/kg dose. Several challenges limited patient enrollment and blood sampling. Additional studies with a larger sample size are required to evaluate the exposure-response relationships in this emergent condition.

Electroencephalographic Seizures in Emergency Department Patients After Treatment for Convulsive Status Epilepticus.

It is unknown how often and how early EEG is obtained in patients presenting with status epilepticus. The Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial enrolled patients with benzodiazepine-refractory seizures and randomized participants to fosphenytoin, levetiracetam, or valproate. The use of early EEG, including frequency of electrographic seizures, was determined in Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial participants. Secondary analysis of 475 enrollments at 58 hospitals to determine the frequency of EEG performed within 24 hours of presentation. The EEG type, the prevalence of electrographic seizures, and characteristics associated with obtaining early EEG were recorded. Chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were calculated as appropriate for univariate and bivariate comparisons. Odds ratios are reported with 95% confidence intervals. A total of 278 of 475 patients (58%) in the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial cohort underwent EEG within 24 hours (median time to EEG: 5 hours [interquartile range: 3-10]). Electrographic seizure prevalence was 14% (95% confidence interval, 10%-19%; 39/278) in the entire cohort and 13% (95% confidence interval, 7%-21%) in the subgroup of patients meeting the primary outcome of the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (clinical treatment success within 60 minutes of randomization). Among subjects diagnosed with electrographic seizures (39), 15 (38%; 95% confidence interval, 25%-54%) had no clinical correlate on the video EEG recording. Electrographic seizures may occur in patients who stop seizing clinically after treatment of convulsive status epilepticus. Clinical correlates might not be present during electrographic seizures. These findings support early initiation of EEG recordings in patients suffering from convulsive status epilepticus, including those with clinical evidence of treatment success.

Treatment of established status epilepticus in the elderly - a study protocol for a prospective multicenter double-blind comparative effectiveness trial (ToSEE)

BackgroundStatus epilepticus (SE) is a common neurological emergency condition that especially affects the elderly and old population. Older people with SE frequently have non-convulsive SE (NCSE) and are also at special risk of suffering a poor outcome. The application of benzodiazepines fails to control SE in about one third of the cases. For benzodiazepine refractory SE (BRSE) in elderly, there is little evidence that would justify the choice of one of the commonly used antiepileptic drugs. The present study aims to generate evidence for the treatment of BRSE in this age group.MethodsWe will conduct a prospective, randomized, double-blind comparative effectiveness study in more than twenty hospitals in Germany over a four-year period. Four hundred and seventy-seven elderly patients (≥ 65 years old) diagnosed with BRSE will be allocated by 1:1 randomization to receive either levetiracetam or valproate. All types of SE will be considered. For the diagnosis NCSE a verification by EEG is required. Levetiracetam or valproate will be administered in one single infusion. The primary endpoint is the stable cessation of ictal activity 15 min after the start of infusion persisting for the following 45 min of observation. EEG recording is maintained over the whole observation period, clinical examinations are conducted in predefined intervals. In case of treatment success patients and study staff remain blinded until 60 min after the start of the infusion. Adverse events will be recorded until the end of the study. EEG data will be reviewed by two external independent experts. To obtain data about the further treatment of SE, intrahospital complications and the functional outcome in the short term the study participants will be observed until the day of discharge or day 30 whichever is earliest.DiscussionToSEE is the first study which shall deliver evidence for the SE-therapy in the elderly and old population in a controlled prospective comparator study. By design it also shall collect information about therapy regimes and outcome aspects of this disease.Trial registrationThe trial has been registered at the German Clinical Trials Register on 3 July, 2020 (DRKS00022308, https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00022308).

The unmet need for rapid epileptic seizure termination (REST).

Approximately 40% of epilepsy patients will continue to experience breakthrough seizures despite stable antiepileptic drug regimens. Rescue treatments have demonstrated efficacy and safety for select seizure emergencies. Outpatient administered intranasal and rectally delivered medications are regulatory approved for acute repetitive seizures (ARS), and injectable benzodiazepines are indicated for parenteral treatment of established status epilepticus. Despite these advances, no studies have been shown to abort an ongoing seizure following patient or caregiver home administration of therapy at the first clinical sign of seizure onset. Such treatment would require rapid systemic absorption without intravenous access, and evidence of seizure cessation within minutes of administration that is superior to placebo (eg, seizure self-regulation). Rapid epileptic seizure termination (REST) treatment may apply to multiple seizure emergencies beyond ARS, including focal or generalized seizures preceded by an aura, flurries of absence or myoclonic seizures, or prolonged focal and generalized seizures at high risk of progression to status epilepticus. Novel investigational drug delivery systems have demonstrated feasibility of intraictal delivery and seizure cessation by two minutes. Ongoing randomized trials of REST treatment for diverse seizure emergencies hold the potential to decrease bouts of mental and physical incapacitation in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy.

Patient and Surrogate Postenrollment Perspectives on Research Using the Exception From Informed Consent: An Integrated Survey

It is important for researchers interested in trials using the exception from informed consent to understand the views and experiences of enrolled individuals. Previous studies have shown that patient and surrogate attitudes are generally positive. These studies were small and did not include pediatric patients, and interviews were often conducted long after trial enrollment. This study sought to explore attitudes toward exception from informed consent in a larger sample and more contemporaneous setting. A 10-item paper-and-pencil survey was integrated into the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial, a randomized trial of 3 treatments for benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus in pediatric and adult patients. Primary domains included attitudes toward trial enrollment, exception from informed consent, and community consultation. Simple descriptive statistics, χ2, and Fisher's exact tests were conducted. Of 317 patients and surrogates, 90% agreed with or were neutral about the statement "I am glad that I/my family member was included in the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial research study," whereas 10% disagreed. Twenty-seven percent disagreed with enrollment in the study without prospective consent. Black participants were more likely than white, other race, and unknown-race participants to disagree with enrollment without prospective consent (36% versus 23%, 14%, and 14%, respectively). Participants indicated that patients (81%), their families (65%), and those at risk for seizures (51%) were most important to include in community consultation. This study aimed to explore attitudes toward exception from informed consent enrollment among participants at all sites in a large, multicenter exception from informed consent trial. General acceptance of trial enrollment was high; acceptance of exception from informed consent specifically was somewhat lower, especially among black participants. Our findings provide further support for targeted community consultation focusing on individuals with connections to the disease under study. Future research should focus on communication in the postenrollment period, especially with individuals who may have concerns about exception from informed consent.

Efficacy of levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, and valproate for established status epilepticus by age group (ESETT): a double-blind, responsive-adaptive, randomised controlled trial

Benzodiazepine-refractory, or established, status epilepticus is thought to be of similar pathophysiology in children and adults, but differences in underlying aetiology and pharmacodynamics might differentially affect response to therapy. In the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT) we compared the efficacy and safety of levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, and valproate in established status epilepticus, and here we describe our results after extending enrolment in children to compare outcomes in three age groups. In this multicentre, double-blind, response-adaptive, randomised controlled trial, we recruited patients from 58 hospital emergency departments across the USA. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were aged 2 years or older, had been treated for a generalised convulsive seizure of longer than 5 min duration with adequate doses of benzodiazepines, and continued to have persistent or recurrent convulsions in the emergency department for at least 5 min and no more than 30 min after the last dose of benzodiazepine. Patients were randomly assigned in a response-adaptive manner, using Bayesian methods and stratified by age group (<18 years, 18-65 years, and >65 years), to levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, or valproate. All patients, investigators, study staff, and pharmacists were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was absence of clinically apparent seizures with improved consciousness and without additional antiseizure medication at 1 h from start of drug infusion. The primary safety outcome was life-threatening hypotension or cardiac arrhythmia. The efficacy and safety outcomes were analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01960075. Between Nov 3, 2015, and Dec 29, 2018, we enrolled 478 patients and 462 unique patients were included: 225 children (aged <18 years), 186 adults (18-65 years), and 51 older adults (>65 years). 175 (38%) patients were randomly assigned to levetiracetam, 142 (31%) to fosphenyltoin, and 145 (31%) were to valproate. Baseline characteristics were balanced across treatments within age groups. The primary efficacy outcome was met in those treated with levetiracetam for 52% (95% credible interval 41-62) of children, 44% (33-55) of adults, and 37% (19-59) of older adults; with fosphenytoin in 49% (38-61) of children, 46% (34-59) of adults, and 35% (17-59) of older adults; and with valproate in 52% (41-63) of children, 46% (34-58) of adults, and 47% (25-70) of older adults. No differences were detected in efficacy or primary safety outcome by drug within each age group. With the exception of endotracheal intubation in children, secondary safety outcomes did not significantly differ by drug within each age group. Children, adults, and older adults with established status epilepticus respond similarly to levetiracetam, fosphenytoin, and valproate, with treatment success in approximately half of patients. Any of the three drugs can be considered as a potential first-choice, second-line drug for benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health.

Lessons from the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial

Convulsive status epilepticus (SE) is a relatively common emergency condition affecting individuals of all ages. The primary goal of treatment is prompt termination of seizures. Where first-line treatment with benzodiazepine has failed to achieve this, a condition known as established SE (ESE), there is uncertainty about which agent to use next. The Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT) is a 3-arm (valproate (VPA), fosphenytoin (FOS), levetiracetam (LEV)), phase III, double-blind randomized comparative effectiveness study in patients aged 2 years and above with established convulsive SE. Enrollment was completed in January 2019, and the results are expected later this year. We discuss lessons learnt during the conduct of the study in relation to the following: ethical considerations; trial design and practical implementation in emergency settings, including pediatric and adult populations; quality assurance; and outcome determination where treating emergency clinicians may lack specialist expertise. We consider that the ESETT is already informing both clinical practice and future trial design.This article is part of the Special Issue “Proceedings of the 7th London-Innsbruck Colloquium on Status Epilepticus and Acute Seizures"

Abstract 134: Patients’ Perspectives on Enrollment in Research Using the Exception From Informed Consent: An Integrated Survey

Introduction: Relatively minimal data exist regarding perspectives of patients (or surrogate decision-makers) after enrollment in clinical trials using the exception from informed consent (EFIC) for emergency research, a regulation essential for resuscitation research. Prior studies have shown that attitudes are generally positive but have enrolled a small proportion of participants and may have been subject to selection bias. Methods: As part of the study protocol, a 10-item paper-and-pencil survey was integrated into the protocol for all sites of the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT) trial, a randomized trial of three treatments for benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus in pediatric and adult patients. All patients (or surrogate) were given the survey after being asked for consent to continue in ESETT. Primary domains included acceptance of trial enrollment, acceptance of EFIC, and views on which population to include in community consultation. Response items primarily used a 5-point Likert scale. Simple descriptive statistics were tabulated. Results: In total, 317 of 443 patients/surrogates completed the survey (71.6% response). Only 7.3% (23/317) disagreed with the statement “I am glad that my family member/I was included in the ESETT research study,” and 24.9% (79/317) disagreed with being included under EFIC. When asked whom researchers should consult during community consultation, 81.1% (257/317) said patients who have had seizures, 64.7% (205/317) said their family members, and individuals at particular risk for seizures (50.8%) (161/317) were most frequently chosen. Only 26.5% (84/317) felt that members of the general public should be consulted. Conclusions: This is the largest study to date of participants’ perspectives on being enrolled in an EFIC trial. Rates of enrollment acceptance were relatively high; acceptance of EFIC specifically was slightly lower. There is much greater support for consulting individuals with connections to the disease under study than the general public or other groups. These findings further suggest that targeted community consultation may be appropriate and the importance of clear communication with participants after enrollment regarding reasons for EFIC use.

267 Research Protocol Training Through an Electronic Learning Module and in Situ Simulation

We describe the process of clinical staff training of a complex emergency research study through a layered approach to disseminating study protocol information to clinical staff. The Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trail (ESETT) seeks to compare effectiveness of fos-phenytoin, levetiracetam, or valproic acid in subjects with benzodiazepine-refractory status epilepticus. ESETT is an EFIC trial in which qualifying subjects can be enrolled by the clinical staff within minutes of ED admission often in the absence of the research team. An e-learning module was created to emphasize crucial clinical care elements of the protocol including: the importance of benzodiazepine dosing and timing, rationale for use of Exception From Informed Consent (EFIC), study drug dosing and administration, the post-infusion assessments, and how to contact the study team. A seizure SIM scenario was drafted based on clinical learning objectives for a successful ESETT enrollment including: recognizing a potential ESETT subject as a patient with seizures despite adequate benzodiazepine dosing (without coordinator prompting); proper study drug administration and follow-up assessments. The study protocol assist device (iPod touch) was set to practice mode and mock-drug (saline) was loaded into the study drug kit. On the day of the SIM, a seizure code was called into ED dispatch and clinical staff to treat a high-fidelity SIM mannequin in status epilepticus. The clinical staff administered mock benzodiazepine doses and then identified the seizing SIM mannequin as a potential ESETT subject. Clinical staff located the ESETT study drug box, verified inclusion/exclusion and study dose, utilized the administered mock study drug and followed the prompts from the protocol assist device through the first post infusion assessment. Immediately after the in situ SIM, a SIM de-brief occurred that included the clinical staff (physicians, nurses and pharmacy staff) and the clinical research team (co-investigator, lead coordinator). The LMS report showed 40/45 (89%) of ED RN staff viewed the e-learning module. During the SIM debriefing, clinical staff and the research team jointly identified logistical barriers to address including: study poster location, slow iPod, procedure to un-blind study drug, proper “next steps for care” in the event of study drug failure. The feedback from the ED staff was that they learn better by doing (kinesthetic learning style). “Hands on is always the best, easier to learn when you get to see and do.” In situ simulation (SIM) is used in clinical education and training, but evidence on its utility for protocol training in research trials is limited. A layered approach to disseminating study protocol information to clinical staff including an e-learning module and kinesthetic learning through an in situ SIM helped the clinical staff incorporate protocol training into their clinical care.

Timing is everything: Where status epilepticus treatment fails

Status epilepticus is an emergency; however, prompt treatment of patients with status epilepticus is challenging. Clinical trials, such as the ESETT (Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial), compare effectiveness of antiepileptic medications, and rigorous examination of effectiveness of care delivery is similarly warranted. We reviewed the medical literature on observed deviations from guidelines, clinical significance, and initiatives to improve timely treatment. We found pervasive, substantial gaps between recommended and "real-world" practice with regard to timing, dosing, and sequence of antiepileptic therapy. Applying quality improvement methodology at the institutional level can increase adherence to guidelines and may improve patient outcomes. Ann Neurol 2017;82:155-165.