Â鶹´«Ã½Ó³»­

Â鶹´«Ã½Ó³»­

Explore the latest content from across our publications
Join The Â鶹´«Ã½Ó³»­

Log In

Forgot Password?
Create New Account

Loading... please wait

Abstract Details

Use of Continuous Electroencephalogram (cEEG) in Critically Ill Patients
Epilepsy/Clinical Neurophysiology (EEG)
Epilepsy/Clinical Neurophysiology (EEG) Posters (7:00 AM-5:00 PM)
032
To examine factors associated with cEEG use and the relationship between cEEG and hospitalization length/cost in critically ill patients across a large-scale multi-institution dataset.
Continuous electroencephalogram (cEEG) has been advocated to monitor brain function in critically ill patients, but is resource-intensive.

We performed a retrospective cross-sectional study using Optum® Clinformatics® Data (01/01/2004-06/30/2019) comprised of nationwide administrative datasets for commercial health plans. We included data from critically ill adults and children, defined as those receiving mechanical ventilation, excluding neonates. We examined cEEG use by covariates including age, sex, race/ethnicity, household income, and neurological comorbidities. After controlling for the covariates, we compared length of hospitalization and cost between patients receiving cEEG and those who did not.
We identified 263,741 critically ill patients (median age [IQR]=69 [56-78] years; children aged <18 years=3.8%; female=48%). cEEG was used in 1,202 (0.5%) overall, more frequently in children than adults (2.0% vs 0.4%, p<0.001). cEEG was less often in Hispanic (adults [0.3%], p<0.001; children [1.4%], p=0.012) compared to White (adults [0.4%]; children [2.2%]), Black (adults [0.6%]; children [2.9%]), and Asian (adults [0.7%]; children [3.6%]). cEEG use was more common among patients with household annual income greater than $75,000 (0.7% vs. 0.4%, p<0.001). Patients undergoing cEEG had more neurological comorbidities (24.2% vs. 10.0%, p<0.001). After controlling for the covariates, patients with cEEG had slightly longer hospital stays (median [IQR]=9 [5-16] vs. 8 [4-14] days, p<0.001) and higher costs (median [IQR]=$121,740 [62,399-239,516] vs. $85,513 [41,319-180,666], p<0.001) compared to patients without cEEG.
Despite increasing study of cEEG in the ICU, cEEG is not widely used nationwide for critically ill patients. ICU cEEG use may reflect disparities for Hispanic patients and those from low-income households. cEEG use was associated with slightly longer hospitalization and higher costs among this critically ill population.
Authors/Disclosures
Ahyuda Oh, PhD (StanfordUniversity School of Medicine)
PRESENTER 		Dr. Oh has nothing to disclose.
Courtney Wusthoff, MD, FÂ鶹´«Ã½Ó³»­ (UC Davis Neurology) Dr. Wusthoff has received personal compensation in the range of $0-$499 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for ICON. Dr. Wusthoff has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving as an Editor, Associate Editor, or Editorial Advisory Board Member for Neurology. The institution of Dr. Wusthoff has received research support from NIH. Dr. Wusthoff has received publishing royalties from a publication relating to health care.
Hyunmi Kim, MD (Stanford University) Dr. Kim has nothing to disclose.