Refine
Document Type
- Article (2) (remove)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- Epileptic seizures (2) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (2) (remove)
Background: Patients with epilepsy often require a specialized treatment, which may differ because of the responsibility of the federal states for healthcare policy in Germany.
Objective: State-specific differences in healthcare structures based on inpatient hospital cases of epilepsy patients between 2000 and 2020 in relation to specialized treatment offers.
Material and methods: The inpatient hospital cases of the German federal states were evaluated using the Friedman test and time series trend analysis. A state-specific inpatient undertreatment or overtreatment of inpatient hospital cases outside the registered state was analyzed by comparing residence-related and treatment site-related case numbers with a threshold of ±5%.
Results: After age adjustment, significantly more inpatient cases were found in the “new states” compared to the “old states” (p < 0.001); the highest number of cases nationwide was found in Saarland with 224.8 ± 11.5 cases per 100,000 inhabitants. The trend analysis showed an increase in cases until the end of 2016 with a trend reversal from 2017 and a further significant decrease in hospital cases in the COVID year 2020. A relative inpatient undertreatment was shown for Brandenburg, Lower Saxony, Rhineland-Palatinate, Saxony-Anhalt, Schleswig-Holstein and Thuringia. Additional, possibly compensatory, inpatient care was found for all city states (Hamburg, Bremen and Berlin) and Baden-Wuerttemberg. In federal states with a relative inpatient undertreatment and/or high inpatient hospital case numbers, there was often a lower availability of specialized epilepsy centers, specialized outpatient clinics and epilepsy outpatient clinics.
Conclusion: In Germany there are state-specific differences in the structure of care, with higher inpatient hospital care in the “new states” and Saarland. In addition, there were federal states with disproportionately higher treatment of patients not registered in this federal state. A potential influencing factor may be the availability of centers with specialized treatment for epilepsy patients.
Objective: The correlation of depleted blood through midline shift in acute subdural hematoma remains the most reliable clinical predictor to date. On the other hand, patient’s ABO blood type has a profound impact on coagulation and hemostasis. We conducted this study to evaluate the role of patient’s blood type in terms of incidence, clinical course and outcome after acute subdural hematoma bleeding.
Methods: 100 patients with acute subdural hematoma treated between 2010 and 2015 at the author’s institution were included. Baseline characteristics and clinical findings including Glasgow coma scale, Glasgow outcome scale, hematoma volume, rebleeding, midline shift, postoperative seizures and the presence of anticoagulation were analyzed for their association with ABO blood type.
Results: Patient’s with blood type O were found to have a lower midline shift (p<0.01) and significantly less seizures (OR: 0.43; p<0.05) compared to non-O patients. Furthermore, patients with blood type A had the a significantly higher midline shift (p<0.05) and a significantly increased risk for postoperative seizures (OR: 4.01; p<0.001). There was no difference in ABO blood type distribution between acute subdural hematoma patients and the average population.
Conclusion: The ABO blood type has significant influence on acute subdural hematoma sequelae. Patient’s with blood type O benefit in their clinical course after acute subdural hematoma whereas blood type A patients are at highest risk for increased midline shift and postoperative seizures. Further studies elucidating the biological mechanisms of blood type depended hemostaseology and its role in acute subdural hematoma are required for the development of an appropriate intervention.