Practical Neurology

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

Practical Neurology 2006;6:64-65; doi:10.1136/jnnp.2005.012345
Copyright © 2006 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stone, J.
Right arrow Articles by Duncan, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Stone, J.
Right arrow Articles by Duncan, R.

Letters to the editor

Tongue biting in pseudoseizures and epilepsy

Jon Stone1, Rod Duncan2

1 Consultant Neurologist, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK
2 Consultant Neurologist, Institute of Neurological Sciences, Southern General Hospital, Glasgow, UK

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Dr J Stone, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Western General Hospital, Crewe Road, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, UK; Jon.Stone@ed.ac.uk

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

We enjoyed Fuller and Lindahl’s article about clinical clues for distinguishing epilepsy from non-epileptic attacks.1 Their comments about the location of tongue biting in non-epileptic attacks (rarely the side, sometimes the tip) may well be correct, but we thought they deserved some additional comment, partly because their analysis omitted a number of relevant studies (see table).2–12 We have combined the mainly small series in the table, admittedly inviting a host of methodological problems. What this literature shows though is that when non-specific "tongue biting" is recorded it isn’t a useful discriminator. Only the Benbadis study6 looked at whether the tip or the side of the tongue was bitten—something that this single study suggests is a highly specific discriminator. In addition, the data may mask differences between the patients who give a history of tongue biting and the patient who shows you a bitten tongue.

So, on . . . [Full text of this article]







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2006 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.