A Clinical Decision Aid for Diagnosing Transient Loss of Consciousness

Development of a Clinical Decision Aid for the Differential Diagnosis of Transient Loss of Consciousness

BACKGROUND: Transient loss of consciousness (TLOC) - defined as spontaneous disruption of consciousness not due to head trauma and with complete recovery - has a lifetime prevalence of 50%. It is one of the commonest neurological complaints in primary and emergency care. Over 90% of TLOC is due to either syncope, epilepsy or dissociative seizures (DS, also known as 'Psychogenic Nonepileptic Seizures'). The rapid and accurate distinction of these diagnoses is vital to allow appropriate further management but at least 20-30% of patients are not managed optimally or misdiagnosed. We have previously demonstrated that, in patients with established diagnoses of epilepsy, syncope, or DS, an automated classifier using only information from 36 questions based on patient experience and lay witness reports (the initial Paroxysmal Event Profile, iPEP) could accurately diagnose 86.0% of patients (with 100% sensitivity and 91.7% specificity for syncope)

AIMS: To calibrate the iPEP for discrimination between syncope, epilepsy, and DS in patients newly presenting with TLOC, validate its performance in an independent sample, and to explore acceptability of the use of such a tool to people with TLOC and witnesses.

METHODS: Nested qualitative-quantitative prospective single-centre development and validation of the iPEP in patients presenting to Emergency Departments, syncope or epilepsy clinics with first presentations of TLOC, with semi-structured interviews conducted with a purposive sample of participants from the quantitative study. The iPEP will be calibrated using a previously-described procedure for variable selection and training of Random Forest (RF) classifiers, and validated with assessment of overall classification accuracy, alongside sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and area under receiver-operating curve for each of the three target diagnoses. Performance will be evaluated against a benchmark set by results from previous research in patients with established diagnoses of epilepsy, syncope, and DS.

OUTPUTS: Results will be submitted for publication in academic and professional literature. If performance from feasibility can be replicated in validation, the iPEP will be suitable to begin process of registration as a medical device for implementation in clinical pathways to minimise inappropriate referrals and treatment, streamline patient pathways, and enable earlier ordering of appropriate investigations to ensure prompt and appropriate diagnosis and management. If pilot performance could be replicated in this population and proportional savings from current estimated costs of misdiagnosis achieved, this could potentially save £63.9 million of annual UK healthcare expenditure.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

186

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Contact Backup

Study Locations

    • South Yorkshire
      • Sheffield, South Yorkshire, United Kingdom, S10 2JF
        • Royal Hallamshire Hospital
      • Sheffield, South Yorkshire, United Kingdom, S5 7AT
        • Northern General Hospital

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

16 years and older (Child, Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

The study population will consist of screened admissions to the Emergency Department and Acute Medical Unit presenting with TLOC, as well as all new patients referred to the Neurology and Cardiology departments with TLOC.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients first presenting with TLOC
  • Referred to secondary care for diagnostic evaluation OR given firm diagnosis of syncope in accordance with European Society of Cardiology guidelines for syncope presentations not requiring further investigation
  • Adult over the age of 16 years
  • Able to complete iPEP questionnaire independently
  • Participants do not need to be native English speaker but do need to have sufficient English language ability to complete iPEP without support

Initial Exclusion Criteria:

  • Unable to give informed consent to participation in research
  • Unable to complete iPEP independently
  • Previous specialist (neurological or cardiological) assessment of TLOC

Criteria for exclusion from analysis:

  • No firm clinical diagnosis of TLOC (and its cause) at end of 6-month follow-up period
  • Mixed diagnosis of multiple TLOC-causing disorders at end of 6-month follow-up; we exclude these participants from analysis as they would not have a single reference standard diagnosis, thus their inclusion in development may reduce model performance (since their questionnaire answers will describe multiple different kinds of episode), and in validation there is no principled way to assess performance of the prediction model if they have more than one reference diagnosis. A previous study of patients with suspected seizures in this population found that only 1.1% of patients could not be given a single aetiological diagnosis, so we do not anticipate this resulting in many exclusions.4
  • Evidence of previous specialist (neurological or cardiological) assessment of TLOC.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort
Intervention / Treatment
Patients presenting with TLOC
A concurrent nested qualitative-quantitative design is used. Patients first presenting to an ED with TLOC (and witnesses) who have contributed to the quantitative part of this project will be offered participation in a qualitative interview study after completion of the iPEP during the initial study procedure. Capturing variation based on diagnosis, gender, age and participant/witness role, a purposive sample of participating participants and witnesses will be invited to semi-structured interviews in which they will be prompted to discuss their experiences of using the iPEP and their views on the accuracy in describing their peri-episodal experiences.
The initial Paroxysmal Event Profile (iPEP) was derived from the paroxysmal event profile (PEP) and paroxysmal event observer (PEO) to provide a diagnostic tool aiming to differentiate between the most common underlying reasons for TLOC presentations: syncope, epilepsy, and dissociative seizures. The iPEP is a 35-item questionnaire developed from the PEP and PEO.5,25 The 5-point frequency scales used in response to each symptom in the PEP and PEO have been replaced with a binary 'present'/'not present' classification in recognition of the fact that the target patient group may have experienced only one or a few episodes of TLOC.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
AUC for syncope
Time Frame: 6 months post-presentation
We will compare classifier-predicted diagnoses against final diagnoses obtained by expert consensus review of medical records. We will define performance in terms of AUC for cardiogenic syncope.
6 months post-presentation

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Overall classifier accuracy
Time Frame: 6 months post-presentation
We will compare classifier-predicted diagnoses against final diagnoses obtained by expert consensus review of medical records. We will define performance in terms of classifier accuracy, and sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for other diagnoses (i.e., epileptic/dissociative seizures). This will enable direct comparison with current rates of misdiagnosis.
6 months post-presentation

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Participant experience
Time Frame: 6-month follow-up
A purposive sample of participants who have consented to be contacted about the additional interview study will be invited to participate in the nested qualitative research. Those consenting will take part in a semi-structured interview by telephone or in person. To help inform future adaptation and implementation of the iPEP, participants' feedback and views on how to communicate the decision aid results will be explored. All interviews will be audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The data will be analysed using NVivo, and thematic analysis undertaken to identify recurring views and opinions.
6-month follow-up

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Markus Reuber, Honorary Consultant Neurologist
  • Principal Investigator: Alistair Wardrope, Specialty Registrar in Neurology

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

February 9, 2022

Primary Completion (Actual)

June 30, 2023

Study Completion (Actual)

June 30, 2023

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

April 19, 2022

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 5, 2022

First Posted (Actual)

May 10, 2022

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

January 3, 2024

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 2, 2024

Last Verified

January 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Consciousness Disorder

Clinical Trials on initial Paroxysmal Event Profile

3
Subscribe