Development of a structured process for the Spanish translation of the 2021 ACNS standardized critical care EEG terminology
Maria Bruzzone1, Clio Rubinos2, Andrea Lowden3, Juan Appendino4, Jorge Vidaurre5, Daniel Sanjuan6, Naiara Garcia Losarcos7, Mauricio Villamar8, Jorge Burneo9, Luis Mayor10, Andres Rodrigues 11, Camilo Gutierrez12, Andres Fernandez13
1Neurology, University of Florida, 2Neurology, University of North Carolina, 3University of Texas Southwestern, 4Alberta Children'S Hospital, 5Nationwide Children's Hospital - OSU, 6HMG Hospital Coyoacan, 7University Hospitals, 8Brown Neurology, 9University of Western Ontario, 10Hospital Universitario Fundacion Santa Fe De Bogot, 11Emory, 12University of Maryland, 13Thomas Jefferson University Hospital
Objective:
To develop a Spanish translation of the 2021 critical care EEG terminology through  a structured consensus of an interdisciplinary group with representation from Latin America and Spain. 

Background:

Aiming for a common language for the classification of electroencephalogram (EEG) findings in critical care (ICU), the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society (ACNS) published the ICU-EEG terminology in 2013, which was updated in 2021. Since this nomenclature has not been published in Spanish, the potential use of the ICU-EEG terminology can be variable when translated into daily practice in Spanish-speaking countries.   

Design/Methods:

The initial translation of the terminology was done in parallel by three subgroups of Spanish-speaking neurophysiologists and neurointensivists representing different regions of Latin America and Spain. Each subgroup worked iteratively on one section of the terminology. Scheduled meetings were carried out with the entire team to discuss translation differences and alternatives, which were recorded for discussion in future planned consensus groups. We have recruited 25 participants from Latin America and Spain to explore their impressions on the applicability, implementation, and regional differences of the translation in different Spanish-speaking countries. Using qualitative methodology, the consensus groups will follow nominal group technique methods.

Results:

The process, common discussion points, and consensus agreements and disagreements of the different terms chosen in the translation will be presented.

Conclusions:

The Spanish language is diverse, and the terms used to describe electroencephalographic findings vary in different countries. It is essential to consider these variations when translating guidelines into other languages. Translations need to be structured, iterative, and consensus-based with representations of different countries with the same language to encourage widespread use and a more homogeneous communication, which can in turn facilitate and encourage future research.

10.1212/WNL.0000000000203572