A shared preference for buccal midazolam did not produce a uniform approach to prescribing, training or withdrawal of rescue plans.
The survey included eighty-six UK and fifty-three Norwegian epilepsy professionals. All identified buccal midazolam as the first-line community rescue choice in the described setting. Norwegian respondents more often provided yearly training and reported different caseload and dose practices. UK respondents more often delegated prescribing to primary care and reviewed emergency plans more frequently. Criteria for withdrawing unused rescue medication also differed.
This was a professional self-report survey without pilot testing before dissemination. Response and selection biases limit representativeness, and geography and service organization may explain some differences. The study measured reported practice rather than administration accuracy, seizure outcomes or comparative patient safety. Its findings do not establish a universally correct training interval or dose.
In a rescue-medication review, examine the individual emergency plan, who received training, how competence was checked and when the plan was reviewed. A prescription alone does not show that a caregiver could deliver the medicine correctly. The paper identifies variation and questions for service improvement. It cannot establish that a particular seizure outcome resulted from one country’s practice pattern or replace the actual plan and training records in a case.
Source: PMC12716287, supplied full-text paper. Findings are paraphrased; forensic implications are an interpretation.
Related: Seizure-Rescue Speed Includes the Time Needed to Deliver a Benzodiazepine.