Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

First-Onset Seizure After Use of an Energy Drink [corrected].



Key Questions Addressed
1 For [population], is caffeine intake above [exposure dose], compared to intakes [exposure dose] or less, associated with adverse effects on acute toxicity*?
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title First-Onset Seizure After Use of an Energy Drink [corrected].
Author KM Babu,MD Zuckerman,JK Cherkes,JB Hack,
Country
Year 2011
Numbers

Secondary Publication Information
There are currently no secondary publications defined for this study.


Extraction Form: Acute Toxicity - Study Design Details
Arms
No arms have been defined in this extraction form.

Design Details
Question... Follow Up Answer Follow-up Answer
Refid 21642791
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What outcome is being evaluated in this paper? Acute
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What is the objective of the study (as reported by the authors)? to present first reported case of adolescent presenting with a new onset seizure associate with E drink use and to discuss caffeine toxicity and importance of reporting clinical findings
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Provide a general description of the methods as reported by the authors. Information should be extracted based on relevance to the SR (i.e., caffeine related methods) 15 year old admitted to ED after tonic clonic seizure following ingestion of 1 cup coffee followed by 2-5 hour energy drinks in rapid succession. medical history taken, treatment for seizure given, brain tomography performed
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
How many outcome-specific endpoints are evaluated? 5
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What is the (or one of the) endpoint(s) evaluated? (Each endpoint listed separately) medical history: no family history of seizures, no drug use
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
List additional health endpoints (separately). seizure was eye witness before admittance to hospital
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
List additional health endpoints (separately)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Notes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Clinical Clinical
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Physiological Physiological
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Other
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What is the study design? Case report
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Randomized or Non-Randomized?
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What were the diagnostics or methods used to measure the outcome? Both
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Optional: Name of Method or short description blood work (standard labs), medical history taken, seizure (eye witness not at hospital), electroencephalogram and MRI for brain exam.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Caffeine (general)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Coffee Coffee
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Chocolate
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Energy drinks Energy drinks
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Gum
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Medicine/Supplement
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Soda
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Tea
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Measured
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Self-report
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Children
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Adolescents Adolescents
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Adults
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Pregnant Women
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What was the reference, comparison, or control group(s)? (e.g. high vs low consumption, number of cups, etc.) none case report
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What were the listed confounders or modifying factors as stated by the authors? (e.g. multi-variable components of models.  Copy from methods) none although they did check for other drug use, this was also a self report which they trusted.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Provide a general description of results (as reported by the authors). 15 year old male ingested coffee followed by 2 rapid 5-hour energy drinks (undisclosed caffeine on label) he suffered a tonic clonic seizure, vomited, had nausea, headaches, tachycardia and hypokalemia and was postictal upon presentation. after treatment for seizure and observation patient recovered
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Did the authors perform a dose-response analysis (or trend/related analysis)? No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What were the authors's observations re: trend analysis?
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What were the author's conclusions? adolescent patients presenting with new onset seizures should be questioned about energy drink use. This history may be instrumental in determining a possible etiology for seizures and essential in preventing further events through abstinence from caffeine. In addition, physicians should consider reporting all suspected energy drinkYrelated adverse events to watchdog resources, such as regional poison control centers, and the Food and Drug Administration via MedWatch.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What were the sources of funding? none reported
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What conflicts of interest were reported? none reported
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Does the exposure (dose) need to be standardized to the SR? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Provide calculations/conversions for the exposure based on the decision tree in the guide (for all endpoints/exposure levels of interest). Used web for 5 hour energy 200mg/2 oz shot X 2 = 400 mg Patient self reported 1 cup of coffee (used our value) = 95 mg Dose 495mg
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
List all the endpoint(s) followed by the dose (mg) which will be used in comparison to Nawrot.  Characterize value as LOAEL/NOAEL, etc. if possible.  495mg: first on-set tonic conic seizure, nausea,, vomiting, confusion, headache, hypokalemia
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Notes regarding selection/listing of endpoints and exposures/doses to be compared to Nawrot. The size of the coffee was not reported so the coffee itself could have had more caffeine
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What is the importance of the study with respect to the adverseness of the outcome? Important
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |


Baseline Characteristics
No baseline characteristics have been defined for this extraction form.



Results & Comparisons

No Results found.
Adverse Events
Arm or Total Title Description Comments

Quality Dimensions
No quality dimensions were specified.

Quality Rating
No quality rating data was found.