10000465 J Clin Psychiatry / Document Archive

Psychiatrist.com Home    Keyword Search

Close [X]

Search Our Sites

Enter search terms below (keywords, titles, authors, or subjects). Then select a category to search and press the Search button. All words are assumed to be required. To search for an exact phrase, put it in quotes. To exclude a term, precede it with a minus sign (-).

Keyword search:

Choose a category:

Choosing the appropriate category will greatly improve your chances of finding the best match.

All files at our sites: J Clin Psychiatry, Primary Care Companion, CME Institute, and MedFair

Search materials from our journals:

Abstracts from The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 1996–present, both regular issues and supplements

PDFs of the full text of The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 1996–present, both regular issues and supplements (Net Society Platinum [paid subscribers])

PDFs of the full text of The Primary Care Companion to The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 1999–present

Search CME offerings:

CME Institute, including CME from journals , supplements, and Web activities for instant CME credit (Net Society Gold [registered users]); also includes information about our CME program

CME activities from regular issues of The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (Net Society Gold [registered users])

CME Supplements from The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (Net Society Gold [registered users])

 

The article you requested is

A Randomized Comparison of High-Charge Right Unilateral Electroconvulsive Therapy and Bilateral Electroconvulsive Therapy in Older Depressed Patients Who Failed to Respond to 5 to 8 Moderate-Charge Right Unilateral Treatments.

J Clin Psychiatry 2002;63:1102-1105
Copyright 2002 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.

To view this item, select one of the options below.

  1. NONSUBSCRIBERS
    1. Purchase this PDF for $30
      If you are not a paid subscriber, you may purchase the PDF.
      (You'll need the free Adobe Acrobat Reader.)
    2. Subscribe
      Receive immediate full-text access to JCP. You can subscribe to JCP online-only ($129) or print + online ($166 individual).
  2. PAID SUBSCRIBERS
    1. Activate
      If you are a paid subscriber to JCP and do not yet have a username and password, activate your subscription now.
    2. Sign in
      As a paid subscriber who has activated your subscription, you have access to the HTML and PDF versions of this item.
  1. Did you forget your password?

Still can't log in? Contact the Circulation Department at 1-800-489-1001 x4 or send an email

| 54.81.170.186

Background: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is the treatment of choice in some older patients with severe depression. When compared with younger depressed patients, older patients have been shown to be as likely to respond to ECT but more likely to develop cognitive impairment. This study addresses whether adults aged 50 years and over who have already failed to respond to at least 5 moderate-charge right unilateral (RUL) ECT treatments (150% above seizure threshold) are more likely to benefit from a switch to high-charge RUL ECT (450% above threshold) or to bilateral (BL) ECT.

Method: Twenty-four patients who were treated with 5 to 8 moderate-charge RUL ECT treatments and who failed to improve sufficiently were randomly assigned to receive either BL ECT (N=11) or high-charge RUL ECT (N=13). Depressive (24-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression) and cognitive scores (Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE]) were compared under double-blind conditions at 3 phases of treatment.

Results: Patients in the BL ECT group exhibited significantly greater cognitive impairment (mean MMSE score decrease of 1.13) than those receiving high-charge RUL ECT (mean MMSE increase of 1.71). There were no statistically significant differences in clinical response to BL or high-charge RUL ECT (63.6% and 61.5%, respectively) or in depressive symptom remission (18.1% and 46.2%).

Conclusion: These results suggest that older patients who fail to respond to moderate-charge RUL ECT may benefit from a switch to high-charge RUL ECT rather than BL ECT. Larger future studies will be needed to compare clinical response in patients switched from moderate-dose RUL ECT to higher-dose RUL or to BL ECT.