Practicality and cost-effectiveness of using MRI compatible EEG system in the critical care setting

•Using MRI compatible EEG reduces non-monitored time for patients in the critical care unit.•MRI compatible EEG electrodes do not interfere with the quality of MRI scans.•Using MRI Compatible EEG is cost-effective because it needs a single hookup and reduces burden for the EEG technician. Continuous...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Epilepsy research 2021-07, Vol.173, p.106623-106623, Article 106623
Hauptverfasser: Nayak, Chetan S., Nattanmai, Premkumar
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:•Using MRI compatible EEG reduces non-monitored time for patients in the critical care unit.•MRI compatible EEG electrodes do not interfere with the quality of MRI scans.•Using MRI Compatible EEG is cost-effective because it needs a single hookup and reduces burden for the EEG technician. Continuous video-EEG (cvEEG) monitoring is a vastly utilized tool for monitoring critically ill patients in the intensive care unit. Our study investigates the clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of using MRI Compatible EEG electrode system for patients being monitored in the intensive care unit. This retrospective study included 14 critically ill patients who underwent cvEEG between March 2019 to March 2020. They were classified into 2 subgroups: Group 1- ‘MRI-compatible EEG’ (mean age: 56.00 ± 19.99 years; M:F = 2:5; N = 7), Group 2 – ‘Conventional EEG’ (mean age: 49.14 ± 24.76 years; M:F = 4:3; N = 7). The EEG monitoring times as well as cost-effectiveness of cvEEG between the groups were compared using Mann-Whitney Test (p ≤ 0.05). We also compared the MRI quality between the groups using Chi-squared test (p ≤ 0.05). The EEG non-monitored time in Group 2 (7.62 ± 6.45 h) was significantly higher than Group 1 (2.71 ± 2.34 h)] (p = 0.025). The average daily cost for cvEEG in Group 1 ($2098.53 ± 493.58) and Group 2 ($2230.58 ± 142.73) was comparable (p = 0.896). The quality of MRI scans between Group 1 (6/7) and 2 (6/7) were also comparable (p = 1.000). The monitoring time lost in patients with MRI Compatible EEG electrodes was significantly lower than the patients with Conventional EEG electrodes. The daily cost of monitoring and the quality of MRI scans were comparable between the 2 groups. We conclude that the use of MRI Compatible EEG electrodes is a practical and cost-effective method to improve the quality of monitoring in critically ill patients.
ISSN:0920-1211
1872-6844
DOI:10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2021.106623