Josep Valls-Sole summarized the activities of members of the panel approved for Amsterdam: Novelties in hands-on courses were the inclusion of surface EMG in the hands on course of EMG (together with conventional and single fiber). Therefore, there were 3 speakers for each the EMG HoC. There were also three speakers for the HoC on nerve conduction studies (nerve conduction, reflexes and echography). There were also HoC courses that we proposed jointly with the panel on Movement Disorders, for the evaluation of tremor, dystonia, myoclonus, etc, and on Pain for psychophysical testing and nociceptive evoked potentials.
For Lisbon, the proposal was to have various HoC of one hour duration (see also point 3 of the agenda). However, the accepted ones are only 4: EMG, Transcranial magnetic stimulation, Nerve Conduction studies and Echography. They also accepted a teaching course proposed by Eleftherios Papathanasiou on Clinical Neurophysiology in Neurorehabilitation and a Focused Workshop, proposed by Walter Paulus on Brain Network reorganization after stroke.
Then, Christian Krarup gave an update on the meeting on guidelines celebrated in Vienna, where Massimo Leone explained the procedure. It was debated the fact that the Panel on clinical neurophysiology needs the collaboration of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology (or its European Chapter) for the production of guidelines. These will require also to join efforts with the panels representing the various disorders in which clinical neurophysiology could contribute.
Tudor Lupescu mentioned that the last scientific update sent had not yet been published at the time of the meeting.
We stressed the importance to collaborate with other panels in the proposals of activities and recommended that members of the Clinical Neurophysiology Panel attend meetings of other panels as the best way to be known by the colleagues making the proposals.
In regard to the Hands-on-Courses, the only explanation given by the organizers for the rejection of many proposals was that there was no room available in Lisbon. Claudia Sommer was the person in charge from the Program Committee to deal with our proposals.
A relation has been initiated between the EAN and the European Chapter of Clinical Neurophysiology. As stated above, the collaboration of representatives from the ECCN with the Clinical Neurophysiology Scientific Panel would be very welcome. However, at this point, the only document existing is a Memorandum of Understanding, which is an expression of the willingness to collaborate between the two societies rather than anything specific. To note is that the members of the Clinical Neurophysiology Scientific Panel have had nothing to do with the realization of such MoU although the Management Members of the panel were requested to manifest their agreement. Walter Paulus, the President of the ECCN and member of our panel attended the meeting and contributed to the explanation.
Letizia Leocani made a proposal for modifying the name of the panel to specifically include on it the therapeutical aspects of Clinical Neurophysiology, mostly brain stimulation. It was discussed and we reached no clear agreement and therefore, we decided not to make any motion in this regard. However, the point was well taken that it would be adequate for our panel to cover this area.
by
Josep Valls-Sole, Spain
Letizia Leocani, Italy
