Responses

PDF
Seizures, safety and submersion: sense and sensibility
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Response to Seizures, safety and submersion: sense and sensibility
    • Richard Appleton, Consultant and Honorary Professor in Paediatric Neurology Alder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust

    I am grateful for the clarification of one specific point made in the original paper published in Archives of Disease in Childhood by Richard Franklin, John Pearn and Amy Peden (Drowning fatalities in childhood: the role of pre-existing medical conditions. Archives of Disease in Childhood 2017; 102:888-93). This relates to their recommendations on swimming safely that reflected both their collective experiential opinion, as well as the recommendations of authorities such as the ‘Royal Life Saving Society – Australia’ and other Australian water safety organisations. Understandably, these authorities will have a significant adult bias and one could – and reasonably should – question some of their criteria, both in terms of ‘seizures’ (i.e. what type of 'seizure') and seizure-frequency. I would challenge the comment made by the International Life Saving Federation in which they state: “Epilepsy submersion and drowning risk is greatest in an identified high-risk group that includes: those with frequent (more than one per year) seizures….”; the majority of paediatricians and paediatric neurologists and probably adult physicians that treat people with epilepsy would not define “frequent” as more than one seizure per year; by definition this would include two seizures per year. My point remains that doctors, and the many different authorities to which they provide expert advice, should no longer consider and cite epilepsy as a single disorder but as a group of disorders...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Response to Seizures, safety and submersion: sense and sensibility
    • Richard C Franklin, Associate Professor Royal Life Saving Society – Australia and James Cook University
    • Other Contributors:
      • John H Pearn, Professor Paediatrics and Child Health
      • Amy E Peden, National Manager - Research and Policy

    The Editorial by Professor Richard Appleton, ‘Seizures, safety and submersion: sense and sensibility’ addresses crucial points relating to children with epilepsy and their optimal, but safe, participation in aquatic activities 1. All agree that the goal is to ensure that children from all backgrounds and with pre-existent medical conditions grow up to have a ‘normal and unrestricted life’ 1. Aquatics are an important activity for all children in both developed and developing nations 2. Our study was undertaken specifically to determine the relative risk of different medical conditions 3. Like the other studies quoted by Professor Appleton, pre-existent epilepsy has been found to pose an increased risk of drowning by a factor of between 2 and 10. The absence of other pre-morbid diagnoses may either reflect a selection bias in that parents are not allowing those children to participate in aquatics or that parents recognise the hazards and put in place appropriate safety strategies. Differential aquatic exposure rates, specific for different pre-existent medical conditions, are unknown; and therefore denominators which define specific risks remain unknown. In our paper we recommend that ‘Children with epilepsy may swim with safety if drug levels are in the therapeutic range, the child has been seizure-free for 6-12 months and compensatory extra supervision is in place’ (3). These reflect the opinions of the authors, but are generally cognat...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.