The Unknown Cost of Epilepsy Misdiagnosis in England and Wales

Dominic C Heaney,Josemir W Sander
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seizure.2007.01.006
IF: 3.414
2007-01-01
Seizure
Abstract:The article by Juarez-Garcia et al. on the costs of epilepsy misdiagnosis in England and Wales1Juarez-Garcia A. Stokes T. Shaw B. Camosso-Stefinovic J. Baker R. The costs of epilepsy misdiagnosis in England and Wales.Seizure. 2006; 15: 598-605Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (47) Google Scholar makes interesting reading. The need for comprehensive epilepsy services to minimise misdiagnosis of epilepsy, and reduce its associated costs is not in doubt. The terminology used by the authors and some the assumptions made, however, need clarification. The estimated prevalence of epilepsy in England and Wales (7.7/1000) and a misdiagnosis rate of 23% were used to estimate that 92,000 people were “misdiagnosed” with epilepsy in 2002. It is not clear why prevalence figures were used, given that most misdiagnosis estimations are based on consecutive referrals (first attendance rate as surrogate for incidence) to specialist clinics-highly selected cohorts in any case, not representative of the wider population of people suspected to have epilepsy. Furthermore, assumptions about costs at time of diagnosis or misdiagnosis (incident cases) and later in disease course (prevalent cases) differ considerably and using one or the other inappropriately introduces considerable error to any overall cost estimate. The number of people misdiagnosed with epilepsy each year is likely to be significantly less than the annual incidence of epilepsy (approximately 20,000/year in England and Wales).2Sander J.W. The epidemiology of epilepsy revisited.Curr Opin Neurol. 2003; 16: 165-170Crossref PubMed Scopus (654) Google Scholar The prevalence of inappropriate diagnosis among the general population is not known, but may be estimated from community-based prevalence studies. One such study in Wrexham, UK, circa 1995–1996 suggested that at that time there was diagnostic doubt in about 16% of attendees of an epilepsy clinic,3Smith D. Defalla B.A. Chadwick D.W. The misdiagnosis of epilepsy and the management of refractory epilepsy in a specialist clinic.QJM. 1999; 92: 15-23Crossref PubMed Scopus (337) Google Scholar which if representative suggests that in England and Wales about 65,000 people may have been misdiagnosed at some point. Temporal trends and geographical variation on this are unknown. The rate at which cases with inappropriate diagnoses are revised (or die) is also unknown. Overall, the failure to distinguish between the costs associated with incident and prevalent cases of inappropriate diagnosis, and over-estimation of the numbers involved significantly weakens the claim that total costs “could reach up to £138 million per year”. A proper study, using appropriate methodology to address this issue is warranted.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?