Responses
Other responses
Jump to comment:
- Published on: 14 April 2016
- Published on: 14 April 2016
- Published on: 14 April 2016Re:Comment on Death in pregnancy: a call for neurological action (JP Leach. Practical Neurology 2015)Show More
The outlined model of cooperative and integrative services for pregnant women with neurological conditions is warmly welcomed (and not a little envied!). While such services are provided the English centres mentioned, it is sad that such high quality provision remains patchy and incomplete. This nettle-grasping should no longer be quiet, but should be loudly heralded and made the norm. The recently updated SIGN guideline...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 14 April 2016Comment on Death in pregnancy: a call for neurological action (JP Leach. Practical Neurology 2015)Show More
Dear Sirs, We welcome Dr Leach's comments and a call for action from Neurologists, regarding service provision for women of childbearing age with neurological disorders1. We would also like to highlight that quietly, a number of us are grasping the nettle. Risk is inherent in clinical practice. Managing risk effectively and pro- actively in preference to reactively minimises the likelihood of a poor outcome. This can be...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared.
Other content recommended for you
- Antiepileptic drugs in pregnancy
- Epilepsy in pregnancy
- Preconception counselling in women with epilepsy
- Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy: basic mechanisms and clinical implications for prevention
- Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy in children: a focused review of incidence and risk factors
- Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy: measures to reduce risk
- Keeping patients with epilepsy safe: a surmountable challenge?
- Treating women with juvenile myoclonic epilepsy
- Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP): a clinical perspective and a search for risk factors
- Genetic variants in incident SUDEP cases from a community-based prospective cohort with epilepsy