- Sokolov, E;
- Bachir, DH Abdoul;
- Sakadi, F;
- Williams, J;
- Vogel, AC;
- Schaekermann, M;
- Tassiou, N;
- Bah, AK;
- Khatri, V;
- Hotan, GC;
- Ayub, N;
- Leung, E;
- Fantaneanu, TA;
- Patel, A;
- Vyas, M;
- Milligan, T;
- Villamar, MF;
- Hoch, D;
- Purves, S;
- Esmaeili, B;
- Stanley, M;
- Lehn‐Schioler, T;
- Tellez‐Zenteno, J;
- Gonzalez‐Giraldo, E;
- Tolokh, I;
- Heidarian, L;
- Worden, L;
- Jadeja, N;
- Fridinger, S;
- Lee, L;
- Law, E;
- Abass, C Fodé;
- Mateen, FJ
Background and purpose
Epilepsy is most common in lower-income settings where access to electroencephalography (EEG) is generally poor. A low-cost tablet-based EEG device may be valuable, but the quality and reproducibility of the EEG output are not established.Methods
Tablet-based EEG was deployed in a heterogeneous epilepsy cohort in the Republic of Guinea (2018-2019), consisting of a tablet wirelessly connected to a 14-electrode cap. Participants underwent EEG twice (EEG1 and EEG2), separated by a variable time interval. Recordings were scored remotely by experts in clinical neurophysiology as to data quality and clinical utility.Results
There were 149 participants (41% female; median age 17.9 years; 66.6% ≤21 years of age; mean seizures per month 5.7 ± SD 15.5). The mean duration of EEG1 was 53 ± 12.3 min and that of EEG2 was 29.6 ± 12.8 min. The mean quality scores of EEG1 and EEG2 were 6.4 [range, 1 (low) to 10 (high); both medians 7.0]. A total of 44 (29.5%) participants had epileptiform discharges (EDs) at EEG1 and 25 (16.8%) had EDs at EEG2. EDs were focal/multifocal (rather than generalized) in 70.1% of EEG1 and 72.5% of EEG2 interpretations. A total of 39 (26.2%) were recommended for neuroimaging after EEG1 and 22 (14.8%) after EEG2. Of participants without EDs at EEG1 (n = 53, 55.8%), seven (13.2%) had EDs at EEG2. Of participants with detectable EDs on EEG1 (n = 23, 24.2%), 12 (52.1%) did not have EDs at EEG2.Conclusions
Tablet-based EEG had a reproducible quality level on repeat testing and was useful for the detection of EDs. The incremental yield of a second EEG in this setting was ~13%. The need for neuroimaging access was evident.