More controversies on the treatment of psychogenic pseudoseizures: An addendum

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

40 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

There is no shortage of controversies when it comes to psychogenic pseudoseizures (PPS). In this addendum to the Iriarte et al. paper [Epilepsy Behav 4 (2003) 354], I review some controversial issues related to the treatment of PPS. First, I advocate the point that our first goal of therapy is not to attempt to stop the occurrence of PPS, but to ensure that patients and families have accepted that they do not suffer from epilepsy, because the most frequent cause of morbidity and mortality seen in these patients is related to their misdiagnosis as epilepsy patients and the resultant aggressive treatment in intensive care units. Remission of PPS should be our second goal! The second controversial point pertains to how long neurologists should continue to follow up patients after a diagnosis of PPS is reached, and I suggest some parameters to be used in reaching such decision. In the third controversial issue, I review the lack of communication between neurologists and psychiatrists exemplified by the misinterpretation by psychiatrists of the diagnostic value of video-EEG-telemetry studies and resulting mixed messages given to patients and families by neurologists and psychiatrists. The fourth controversial point pertains to the criteria to discontinue antiepileptic drugs after a diagnosis of PPS has been established. Finally, I discuss the timing of introducing a psychogenic cause during the presentation of the diagnosis to patient and family.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)360-364
Number of pages5
JournalEpilepsy and Behavior
Volume4
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Psychiatry
Epilepsy
Therapeutics
Telemetry
Diagnostic Errors
Anticonvulsants
Intensive Care Units
Electroencephalography
Communication
Morbidity
Mortality
Neurologists

Keywords

  • Antiepileptic drugs
  • Dissociative disorders
  • Intractable epilepsy
  • Somatoform disorders
  • Status epilepticus

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Behavioral Neuroscience
  • Neurology

Cite this

More controversies on the treatment of psychogenic pseudoseizures : An addendum. / Kanner, Andres M.

In: Epilepsy and Behavior, Vol. 4, No. 3, 06.2003, p. 360-364.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{7a44f463d1de42c8b0c5165d6f28da69,
title = "More controversies on the treatment of psychogenic pseudoseizures: An addendum",
abstract = "There is no shortage of controversies when it comes to psychogenic pseudoseizures (PPS). In this addendum to the Iriarte et al. paper [Epilepsy Behav 4 (2003) 354], I review some controversial issues related to the treatment of PPS. First, I advocate the point that our first goal of therapy is not to attempt to stop the occurrence of PPS, but to ensure that patients and families have accepted that they do not suffer from epilepsy, because the most frequent cause of morbidity and mortality seen in these patients is related to their misdiagnosis as epilepsy patients and the resultant aggressive treatment in intensive care units. Remission of PPS should be our second goal! The second controversial point pertains to how long neurologists should continue to follow up patients after a diagnosis of PPS is reached, and I suggest some parameters to be used in reaching such decision. In the third controversial issue, I review the lack of communication between neurologists and psychiatrists exemplified by the misinterpretation by psychiatrists of the diagnostic value of video-EEG-telemetry studies and resulting mixed messages given to patients and families by neurologists and psychiatrists. The fourth controversial point pertains to the criteria to discontinue antiepileptic drugs after a diagnosis of PPS has been established. Finally, I discuss the timing of introducing a psychogenic cause during the presentation of the diagnosis to patient and family.",
keywords = "Antiepileptic drugs, Dissociative disorders, Intractable epilepsy, Somatoform disorders, Status epilepticus",
author = "Kanner, {Andres M}",
year = "2003",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1016/S1525-5050(03)00114-8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "4",
pages = "360--364",
journal = "Epilepsy and Behavior",
issn = "1525-5050",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - More controversies on the treatment of psychogenic pseudoseizures

T2 - An addendum

AU - Kanner, Andres M

PY - 2003/6

Y1 - 2003/6

N2 - There is no shortage of controversies when it comes to psychogenic pseudoseizures (PPS). In this addendum to the Iriarte et al. paper [Epilepsy Behav 4 (2003) 354], I review some controversial issues related to the treatment of PPS. First, I advocate the point that our first goal of therapy is not to attempt to stop the occurrence of PPS, but to ensure that patients and families have accepted that they do not suffer from epilepsy, because the most frequent cause of morbidity and mortality seen in these patients is related to their misdiagnosis as epilepsy patients and the resultant aggressive treatment in intensive care units. Remission of PPS should be our second goal! The second controversial point pertains to how long neurologists should continue to follow up patients after a diagnosis of PPS is reached, and I suggest some parameters to be used in reaching such decision. In the third controversial issue, I review the lack of communication between neurologists and psychiatrists exemplified by the misinterpretation by psychiatrists of the diagnostic value of video-EEG-telemetry studies and resulting mixed messages given to patients and families by neurologists and psychiatrists. The fourth controversial point pertains to the criteria to discontinue antiepileptic drugs after a diagnosis of PPS has been established. Finally, I discuss the timing of introducing a psychogenic cause during the presentation of the diagnosis to patient and family.

AB - There is no shortage of controversies when it comes to psychogenic pseudoseizures (PPS). In this addendum to the Iriarte et al. paper [Epilepsy Behav 4 (2003) 354], I review some controversial issues related to the treatment of PPS. First, I advocate the point that our first goal of therapy is not to attempt to stop the occurrence of PPS, but to ensure that patients and families have accepted that they do not suffer from epilepsy, because the most frequent cause of morbidity and mortality seen in these patients is related to their misdiagnosis as epilepsy patients and the resultant aggressive treatment in intensive care units. Remission of PPS should be our second goal! The second controversial point pertains to how long neurologists should continue to follow up patients after a diagnosis of PPS is reached, and I suggest some parameters to be used in reaching such decision. In the third controversial issue, I review the lack of communication between neurologists and psychiatrists exemplified by the misinterpretation by psychiatrists of the diagnostic value of video-EEG-telemetry studies and resulting mixed messages given to patients and families by neurologists and psychiatrists. The fourth controversial point pertains to the criteria to discontinue antiepileptic drugs after a diagnosis of PPS has been established. Finally, I discuss the timing of introducing a psychogenic cause during the presentation of the diagnosis to patient and family.

KW - Antiepileptic drugs

KW - Dissociative disorders

KW - Intractable epilepsy

KW - Somatoform disorders

KW - Status epilepticus

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0141615081&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0141615081&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S1525-5050(03)00114-8

DO - 10.1016/S1525-5050(03)00114-8

M3 - Article

C2 - 12791343

AN - SCOPUS:0141615081

VL - 4

SP - 360

EP - 364

JO - Epilepsy and Behavior

JF - Epilepsy and Behavior

SN - 1525-5050

IS - 3

ER -