Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGencdal, Isil
dc.contributor.authorELMALI YAZICI, Ayşe Deniz
dc.contributor.authorEmekli, Ahmed Serkan
dc.contributor.authorOege, Ali Emre
dc.contributor.authorÖZDAĞ ACARLI, Ayşe Nur
dc.contributor.authorBASLO, Mehmet Barış
dc.contributor.authorKOCASOY ORHAN, Elif
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-10T12:09:25Z
dc.date.available2023-10-10T12:09:25Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.citationGencdal I., ÖZDAĞ ACARLI A. N., ELMALI YAZICI A. D., Emekli A. S., Oege A. E., BASLO M. B., KOCASOY ORHAN E., "Why electrophysiological reassessment is needed? The experience of our laboratory - A cross-sectional study", NEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES AND NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, cilt.39, sa.2, ss.74-78, 2022
dc.identifier.issn2636-865X
dc.identifier.othervv_1032021
dc.identifier.otherav_1b361228-f3a4-44af-8e1b-e5572c751f5b
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12627/189934
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.4103/nsn.nsn_233_21
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Requesting repetition of an electrodiagnostic examination (EDX) for follow-up and/or diagnostic verification is common in the daily practice of a reference center. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate demographical and electrophysiological characteristics of the patients who were referred to a reference electrophysiology laboratory for reassessment, to explore the underlying reasons, and motives for ordering a reassessment. Methods: Patients who had at least one EDX study within the last year in one of the two different time periods (winter and summer) were included in the study. Their demographical features, preliminary diagnosis, and electrophysiological findings were assessed and compared with their previous EDX interpretations. Results: Thirty-five (14 female, 21 male) patients (7,7%) out of 457 patients from the winter period (November 11, 2018-December 12, 2018) and 38 (20 female, 18 male) patients (7,8%) out of 487 patients from the summer period (July 01, 2019-August 08, 2019) were included in the study. Age, gender, preliminary diagnosis, and the number of previous electrophysiologic tests were statistically similar between the two groups. The most common reason for reassessment was to verify or to follow-up on a diagnosis of motor neuron disease or polyneuropathy. Compared to the summer group, the patients who had previous EDX in a different center were more common in the winter group, mean duration between EDX studies was also shorter. Conclusion: In this study, we have inspected the patients referred to our laboratory within two different time frames in a year for a repeat EDX study. It was observed that the number of patients who underwent a repeat EDX was relatively low, and there was no significant difference not only in the preliminary diagnosis but also in the electrophysiological findings.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.subjectHücresel ve Moleküler Sinirbilim
dc.subjectSinirbilim (çeşitli)
dc.subjectGenel Sinirbilim
dc.subjectİnsan Bilgisayar Etkileşimi
dc.subjectFizik Bilimleri
dc.subjectDuyusal Sistemler
dc.subjectGelişimsel Sinirbilim
dc.subjectBilişsel Sinirbilim
dc.subjectTemel Bilimler
dc.subjectYaşam Bilimleri
dc.subjectYaşam Bilimleri (LIFE)
dc.subjectSinirbilim ve Davranış
dc.subjectSİNİR BİLİMİ
dc.titleWhy electrophysiological reassessment is needed? The experience of our laboratory - A cross-sectional study
dc.typeMakale
dc.relation.journalNEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES AND NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
dc.contributor.departmentİstanbul Üniversitesi , ,
dc.identifier.volume39
dc.identifier.issue2
dc.identifier.startpage74
dc.identifier.endpage78
dc.contributor.firstauthorID4291390


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record