scholarly journals Conversations with a neurologist

2015 ◽  
Vol 84 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-31
Author(s):  
Han Yan ◽  
Ramona Neferu

In the second of three interviews in this issue, we speak to Dr Christen Shoesmith. Dr Shoesmith is a neurologist and the director of the Motor Neuron Diseases Clinic at the London Health Sciences Centre (LHSC). She runs the local clinical research trials in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and also sits on the ALS Canada Scientific Medical Advisory Panel. She is also heavily involved in medical education at the undergraduate, residency, and fellowship levels. She is an Assistant Professor of Neurology at Western University.

2017 ◽  
pp. 15-32
Author(s):  
Satish V. Khadilkar ◽  
Rakhil S. Yadav ◽  
Bhagyadhan A. Patel

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Owen Connolly ◽  
Laura Le Gall ◽  
Gavin McCluskey ◽  
Colette G Donaghy ◽  
William J Duddy ◽  
...  

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis is a rare and fatal neurodegenerative disease characterised by progressive deterioration of upper and lower motor neurons that eventually culminates in severe muscle atrophy, respiratory failure and death. There is a concerning lack of understanding regarding the mechanisms that lead to the onset of ALS and as a result there are no reliable biomarkers that aid in the early detection of the disease nor is there an effective treatment. This review first considers the clinical phenotypes associated with ALS, and discusses the broad categorisation of ALS and ALS-mimic diseases into upper and lower motor neuron diseases, before focusing on the genetic aetiology of ALS and considering the potential relationship of mutations of different genes to variations in phenotype. For this purpose, a systematic review is conducted collating data from 107 original published clinical studies on monogenic forms of the disease, surveying the age and site of onset, disease duration and motor neuron involvement. The collected data highlight the complexity of the disease’s genotype–phenotype relationship, and thus the need for a nuanced approach to the development of clinical assays and therapeutics.


BMC Neurology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Remko M. van Eenennaam ◽  
Willeke J. Kruithof ◽  
Michael A. van Es ◽  
Esther T. Kruitwagen-van Reenen ◽  
Henk-Jan Westeneng ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Personalized ENCALS survival prediction model reliably estimates the personalized prognosis of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Concerns were raised on discussing personalized prognosis without causing anxiety and destroying hope. Tailoring communication to patient readiness and patient needs mediates the impact of prognostic disclosure. We developed a communication guide to support physicians in discussing personalized prognosis tailored to individual needs and preferences of people with ALS and their families. Methods A multidisciplinary working group of neurologists, rehabilitation physicians, and healthcare researchers A) identified relevant topics for guidance, B) conducted a systematic review on needs of patients regarding prognostic discussion in life-limiting disease, C) drafted recommendations based on evidence and expert opinion, and refined and finalized these recommendations in consensus rounds, based on feedback of an expert advisory panel (patients, family member, ethicist, and spiritual counsellor). Results A) Topics identified for guidance were 1) filling in the ENCALS survival model, and interpreting outcomes and uncertainty, and 2) tailoring discussion to individual needs and preferences of patients (information needs, role and needs of family, severe cognitive impairment or frontotemporal dementia, and non-western patients). B) 17 studies were included in the systematic review. C) Consensus procedures on drafted recommendations focused on selection of outcomes, uncertainty about estimated survival, culturally sensitive communication, and lack of decisional capacity. Recommendations for discussing the prognosis include the following: discuss prognosis based on the prognostic groups and their median survival, or, if more precise information is desired, on the interquartile range of the survival probability. Investigate needs and preferences of the patients and their families for prognostic disclosure, regardless of cultural background. If the patient does not want to know their prognosis, with patient permission discuss the prognosis with their family. If the patient is judged to lack decisional capacity, ask the family if they want to discuss the prognosis. Tailor prognostic disclosure step by step, discuss it in terms of time range, and emphasize uncertainty of individual survival time. Conclusion This communication guide supports physicians in tailoring discussion of personalized prognosis to the individual needs and preferences of people with ALS and their families.


Data in Brief ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 105229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Bede ◽  
Rangariroyashe H. Chipika ◽  
Eoin Finegan ◽  
Stacey Li Hi Shing ◽  
Kai Ming Chang ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document