Wearable technology in epilepsy: The views of patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals


      • Epilepsy service users are interested in the application of wearables in routine care.
      • Uncertainty about the usefulness of wearable devices limited their current use.
      • Commonly used, discrete multimodal devices were preferred for long-term use.
      • An automated device-generated alarm feature should be considered with caution.
      • Specific epilepsy care team personnel should be dedicated to digital data handling.



      In recent years, digital technology and wearable devices applied to seizure detection have progressively become available. In this study, we investigated the perspectives of people with epilepsy (PWE), caregivers (CG), and healthcare professionals (HP). We were interested in their current use of digital technology as well as their willingness to use wearables to monitor seizures. We also explored the role of factors influencing engagement with technology, including demographic and clinical characteristics, data confidentiality, need for technical support, and concerns about strain or increased workload.


      An online survey drawing on previous data collected via focus groups was constructed and distributed via a web link. Using logistic regression analyses, demographic, clinical, and other factors identified to influence engagement with technology were correlated with reported use and willingness to use digital technology and wearables for seizure tracking.


      Eighty-seven surveys were completed, fifty-two (59.7%) by PWE, 13 (14.4%) by CG, and 22 (25.3%) by HP. Responders were familiar with multiple digital technologies, including the Internet, smartphones, and personal computers, and the use of digital services was similar to the UK average. Moreover, age and disease-related factors did not influence access to digital technology. The majority of PWE were willing to use a wearable device for long-term seizure tracking. However, only a limited number of PWE reported current regular use of wearables, and nonusers attributed their choice to uncertainty about the usefulness of this technology in epilepsy care. People with epilepsy envisaged the possibility of understanding their condition better through wearables and considered, with caution, the option to send automatic emergency calls. Despite concerns around accuracy, data confidentiality, and technical support, these factors did not limit PWE's willingness to use digital technology. Caregivers appeared willing to provide support to PWE using wearables and perceived a reduction of their workload and anxiety. Healthcare professionals identified areas of application for digital technologies in their clinical practice, pending an appropriate reorganization of the clinical team to share the burden of data reviewing and handling.


      Unlike people who have other chronic health conditions, PWE appeared not to be at risk of digital exclusion. This study highlighted a great interest in the use of wearable technology across epilepsy service users, carers, and healthcare professionals, which was independent of demographic and clinical factors and outpaced data security and technology usability concerns.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Epilepsy & Behavior
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Ngugi A.K.
        • Bottomley C.
        • Kleinschmidt I.
        • Sander J.W.
        • Newton C.R.
        Estimation of the burden of active and life-time epilepsy: a meta-analytic approach.
        Epilepsia. 2010; 51: 883-890
        • Shorvon S.
        • Guerrini R.
        • Cook M.
        • Lhatoo S.
        Oxford textbook of epilepsy and epileptic seizures.
        Oxford University Press, 2012
        • Cook M.J.
        • O'Brien T.J.
        • Berkovic S.F.
        • Murphy M.
        • Morokoff A.
        • Fabinyi G.
        • et al.
        Prediction of seizure likelihood with a long-term, implanted seizure advisory system in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy: a first-in-man study.
        Lancet Neurol. 2013; 12: 563-571
        • Schulze-Bonhage A.
        • Sales F.
        • Wagner K.
        • Teotonio R.
        • Carius A.
        • Schelle A.
        • et al.
        Views of patients with epilepsy on seizure prediction devices.
        Epilepsy Behav. 2010; 18: 388-396
        • Sarasohn-Kahn J.
        The connected patient: charting the vital signs of remote health monitoring.
        HealthCare Foundation, California2011
        • Vegesna A.
        • Tran M.
        • Angelaccio M.
        • Arcona S.
        Remote patient monitoring via non-invasive digital technologies: a systematic review.
        Telemed J E Health. 2017; 23: 3-17
        • Ramgopal S.
        • Thome-Souza S.
        • Jackson M.
        • Kadish N.S.
        • Fernandez I.S.
        • Klehm J.
        • et al.
        Seizure detection, seizure prediction, and closed-loop warning systems in epilepsy.
        Epilepsy Behav. 2014; : 291-307
        • Ulate-Campos A.
        • Coughlin F.
        • Gaínza-Lein M.
        • Sánchez Fernández I.
        • Pearl P.L.
        • Loddenkemper T.
        Automated seizure detection systems and their effectiveness for each type of seizure.
        Seizure. 2016; 40: 88-101
        • Robotham D.
        • Satkunanathan S.
        • Doughty L.
        • Wykes T.
        Do we still have a digital divide in mental health? A five-year survey follow-up.
        J Med Internet Res. 2016; 18: e309
        • Hoppe C.
        • Feldmann M.
        • Blachut B.
        • Surges R.
        • Elger C.E.
        • Helmstaedter C.
        Novel techniques for automated seizure registration: patients' wants and needs.
        Epilepsy Behav. 2015; 52: 1-7
        • Tovar Quiroga Diego F.
        • Britton W.B.
        • Wirrell C.E.
        Patient and caregiver view on seizure detection devices: a survey study.
        Seizure. 2016; 41: 179-181
        • Van de Vel A.
        • Smets K.
        • Wouters K.
        • Ceulemans B.
        Automated non-EEG based seizure detection: do users have a say?.
        Epilepsy Behav. 2016; 62: 121-128
        • Davis M.M.
        • Freeman M.
        • Kaye J.
        • Vuckovic N.
        • Buckley D.I.
        A systematic review of clinician and staff views on the acceptability of incorporating remote monitoring technology into primary care.
        Telemed J E Health. 2014; 20: 428-438
      1. Office for National Statistics [2016]. Internet users in the UK: 2016. website.

        • Wike R.
        • Simmons K.
        Global support for principle of free expression, but opposition to some forms of speech.
        Pew Research Center, 2015
        • Patel A.D.
        • Moss R.
        • Rust S.W.
        • Patterson J.
        • Strouse R.
        • Gedela S.
        • et al.
        Patient-centered design criteria for wearable seizure detection devices.
        Epilepsy Behav. 2016; 64: 116-121
        • Arthus S.
        • Zaveri H.P.
        • Frei M.G.
        • Osorio I.
        Patient and caregiver perspectives on seizure prediction.
        Epilepsy Behav. 2010; 19: 474-477
        • Mormann F.
        • Elger C.E.
        • Lehnertz K.
        Seizure anticipation: from algorithms to clinical practice.
        Curr Opin Neurol. 2006; 19: 187-193
        • Schelter B.
        • Winterhalder M.
        • Feldwisch genannt Drentrup H.
        • Wohlmuth J.
        • Nawrath J.
        • Brandt A.
        • et al.
        Seizure prediction:the impact of long prediction horizons.
        Epilepsy Res. 2007; 73: 213-217
        • Bidwell J.
        • Khuwatsamrit T.
        • Askew B.
        • Ehrenberg J.A.
        • Helmers S.
        Seizure reporting technologies for epilepsy treatment: a review of clinical information needs and supporting technologies.
        Seizure. 2015; 32: 109-117