Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Dominic C Heaney a Department of Clinical and Experimental Epilepsy,
Institute of Neurology, University College London, London WC1N
3BG, b Environmental Epidemiology Unit, London School of Hygiene and
Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT
Correspondence to: J W S Sander
l.sander{at}ion.ucl.ac.uk
Objective:
To determine the incidence of epilepsy in a general practice population and its variation with socioeconomic deprivation.
What is already known on this topic
A small number of epidemiological studies have confirmed this
association but have not established the direction of causality What this study adds
Socioeconomic deprivation is an important risk factor for the
development of epilepsy, though the results may partly reflect
differences in incidence within and outside London
Design:
Prospective surveillance for new cases over an 18 or 24 month period.
Participants:
All patients on practice registers
categorised for deprivation with the Carstairs score of their postcode.
Setting:
20 general practices in London and south
east England.
Main outcome measure:
Confirmed diagnosis of epilepsy.
Results:
190 new cases of epilepsy were identified during 369 283 person years of observation (crude incidence 51.5 (95%
confidence interval 44.4 to 59.3) per 100 000 per year). The incidence
was 190 (138 to 262) per 100 000 in children aged 0-4 years, 30.8 (21.3 to 44.6) in those aged 45-64 years, and 58.7 (42.5 to 81.0) in
those aged
65 years. There was no apparent difference in incidence
between males and females. The incidence showed a strong association
with socioeconomic deprivation, the age and sex adjusted incidence in
the most deprived fifth of the study population being 2.33 (1.46 to
3.72) times that in the least deprived fifth (P=0.001 for trend
across fifths). Adjustment for area (London v outside
London) weakened the association with deprivation (rate ratio 1.62 (0.91 to 2.88), P=0.12 for trend).
Conclusions:
The incidence of epilepsy seems to
increase with socioeconomic deprivation, though the association may be confounded by other factors.
Epilepsy is associated with a wide range of markers of social and
economic disadvantage
The incidence of epilepsy, adjusted for age and sex, in the most
deprived fifth of the study population was 2.3 times that in the least
deprived fifth