Coroner and medical examiner documentation of sudden unexplained deaths in epilepsy

Paul L. Schraeder, Kristen Delin, Robyn L. McClelland, Elson L. So

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

41 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Prevalence data for sudden unexplained death in epilepsy (SUDEP) are hampered by its underuse as a final diagnosis on death certificates in appropriate cases. Few data exist about how coroners (COs) and medical examiners (MEs) in the United States use the diagnosis of SUDEP. Methods: A survey instrument that addressed demographics, professional background, annual cases of epilepsy, seizure history, percentage of post-mortem examinations, cause of death, and use of SUDEP as a diagnosis was sent to all COs and MEs in the United States. Unadjusted comparisons between categorical variables used χ2 tests. A multiple regression model examined the odds of respondents considering SUDEP to be a valid diagnosis. Results: Of 2995 surveys, 80.7% went to COs and 19.3% to MEs. The response rate was 15.9% for COs and 21.8% for MEs. Acknowledgment of SUDEP as a valid entity was greatest among pathologists (83.5%) versus other physicians and non-physicians (P < .001) and correlated with higher autopsy rates and seeing more cases of epilepsy. In actual practice, SUDEP was not used routinely as a death certificate diagnosis in most cases with no cause of death found at autopsy by any group in the survey regardless of title, educational background, location, autopsy rate, or number of seizure cases seen annually. Conclusions: SUDEP appears to be an underused final diagnosis by COs and MEs throughout the United States. There is a need to educate officials at all levels about this diagnosis in persons who have epilepsy with no other cause of death.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)137-143
Number of pages7
JournalEpilepsy Research
Volume68
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2006

Fingerprint

Coroners and Medical Examiners
Sudden Death
Documentation
Epilepsy
Autopsy
Cause of Death
Death Certificates
Seizures
Demography
Physicians

Keywords

  • Coroners
  • Medical examiners
  • SUDEP
  • Survey

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neurology
  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

Coroner and medical examiner documentation of sudden unexplained deaths in epilepsy. / Schraeder, Paul L.; Delin, Kristen; McClelland, Robyn L.; So, Elson L.

In: Epilepsy Research, Vol. 68, No. 2, 02.2006, p. 137-143.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Schraeder, Paul L. ; Delin, Kristen ; McClelland, Robyn L. ; So, Elson L. / Coroner and medical examiner documentation of sudden unexplained deaths in epilepsy. In: Epilepsy Research. 2006 ; Vol. 68, No. 2. pp. 137-143.
@article{44acac32c99c4b0f875603e153404c28,
title = "Coroner and medical examiner documentation of sudden unexplained deaths in epilepsy",
abstract = "Background: Prevalence data for sudden unexplained death in epilepsy (SUDEP) are hampered by its underuse as a final diagnosis on death certificates in appropriate cases. Few data exist about how coroners (COs) and medical examiners (MEs) in the United States use the diagnosis of SUDEP. Methods: A survey instrument that addressed demographics, professional background, annual cases of epilepsy, seizure history, percentage of post-mortem examinations, cause of death, and use of SUDEP as a diagnosis was sent to all COs and MEs in the United States. Unadjusted comparisons between categorical variables used χ2 tests. A multiple regression model examined the odds of respondents considering SUDEP to be a valid diagnosis. Results: Of 2995 surveys, 80.7{\%} went to COs and 19.3{\%} to MEs. The response rate was 15.9{\%} for COs and 21.8{\%} for MEs. Acknowledgment of SUDEP as a valid entity was greatest among pathologists (83.5{\%}) versus other physicians and non-physicians (P < .001) and correlated with higher autopsy rates and seeing more cases of epilepsy. In actual practice, SUDEP was not used routinely as a death certificate diagnosis in most cases with no cause of death found at autopsy by any group in the survey regardless of title, educational background, location, autopsy rate, or number of seizure cases seen annually. Conclusions: SUDEP appears to be an underused final diagnosis by COs and MEs throughout the United States. There is a need to educate officials at all levels about this diagnosis in persons who have epilepsy with no other cause of death.",
keywords = "Coroners, Medical examiners, SUDEP, Survey",
author = "Schraeder, {Paul L.} and Kristen Delin and McClelland, {Robyn L.} and So, {Elson L.}",
year = "2006",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2005.10.004",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "68",
pages = "137--143",
journal = "Epilepsy Research",
issn = "0920-1211",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Coroner and medical examiner documentation of sudden unexplained deaths in epilepsy

AU - Schraeder, Paul L.

AU - Delin, Kristen

AU - McClelland, Robyn L.

AU - So, Elson L.

PY - 2006/2

Y1 - 2006/2

N2 - Background: Prevalence data for sudden unexplained death in epilepsy (SUDEP) are hampered by its underuse as a final diagnosis on death certificates in appropriate cases. Few data exist about how coroners (COs) and medical examiners (MEs) in the United States use the diagnosis of SUDEP. Methods: A survey instrument that addressed demographics, professional background, annual cases of epilepsy, seizure history, percentage of post-mortem examinations, cause of death, and use of SUDEP as a diagnosis was sent to all COs and MEs in the United States. Unadjusted comparisons between categorical variables used χ2 tests. A multiple regression model examined the odds of respondents considering SUDEP to be a valid diagnosis. Results: Of 2995 surveys, 80.7% went to COs and 19.3% to MEs. The response rate was 15.9% for COs and 21.8% for MEs. Acknowledgment of SUDEP as a valid entity was greatest among pathologists (83.5%) versus other physicians and non-physicians (P < .001) and correlated with higher autopsy rates and seeing more cases of epilepsy. In actual practice, SUDEP was not used routinely as a death certificate diagnosis in most cases with no cause of death found at autopsy by any group in the survey regardless of title, educational background, location, autopsy rate, or number of seizure cases seen annually. Conclusions: SUDEP appears to be an underused final diagnosis by COs and MEs throughout the United States. There is a need to educate officials at all levels about this diagnosis in persons who have epilepsy with no other cause of death.

AB - Background: Prevalence data for sudden unexplained death in epilepsy (SUDEP) are hampered by its underuse as a final diagnosis on death certificates in appropriate cases. Few data exist about how coroners (COs) and medical examiners (MEs) in the United States use the diagnosis of SUDEP. Methods: A survey instrument that addressed demographics, professional background, annual cases of epilepsy, seizure history, percentage of post-mortem examinations, cause of death, and use of SUDEP as a diagnosis was sent to all COs and MEs in the United States. Unadjusted comparisons between categorical variables used χ2 tests. A multiple regression model examined the odds of respondents considering SUDEP to be a valid diagnosis. Results: Of 2995 surveys, 80.7% went to COs and 19.3% to MEs. The response rate was 15.9% for COs and 21.8% for MEs. Acknowledgment of SUDEP as a valid entity was greatest among pathologists (83.5%) versus other physicians and non-physicians (P < .001) and correlated with higher autopsy rates and seeing more cases of epilepsy. In actual practice, SUDEP was not used routinely as a death certificate diagnosis in most cases with no cause of death found at autopsy by any group in the survey regardless of title, educational background, location, autopsy rate, or number of seizure cases seen annually. Conclusions: SUDEP appears to be an underused final diagnosis by COs and MEs throughout the United States. There is a need to educate officials at all levels about this diagnosis in persons who have epilepsy with no other cause of death.

KW - Coroners

KW - Medical examiners

KW - SUDEP

KW - Survey

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=31544468951&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=31544468951&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2005.10.004

DO - 10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2005.10.004

M3 - Review article

C2 - 16423504

AN - SCOPUS:31544468951

VL - 68

SP - 137

EP - 143

JO - Epilepsy Research

JF - Epilepsy Research

SN - 0920-1211

IS - 2

ER -