Electroconvulsive Therapy Credentialing for Psychiatrists-Review of Required Standards Across States and Territories in Australia.

ABSTRACT: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a complex medical procedure, the delivery of which requires specialist knowledge and skills. We reviewed the standards required for ECT credentialing in different jurisdictions in Australia. We reviewed the Chief Psychiatrist guidelines and statewide policy standards on ECT and focused on standards required for initial credentialing and ongoing privileging in ECT. We compared the credentialing requirements within these documents with the standards specified in the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists professional practice guideline for ECT. Most of the jurisdictions had specific standards for initial credentialing and maintenance of this credentialing; however, there was significant variance in the credentialing process and standards required. It would be useful to have a minimum standard for credentialing for ECT psychiatrists and prescribers. This standard would be relevant for practice of ECT internationally. States and territories would have the responsibility for implementation of these standards. Appropriate training and establishing good clinical governance processes are essential to the provision of high quality ECT.

Prescribing electroconvulsive therapy for depression: Not as simple as it used to be.

In the last century, prescribing electroconvulsive therapy usually involved considering the relative merits of unilateral versus bilateral electroconvulsive therapy, with most other parameters fixed. However, research over the last 30 years has discovered that several parameters of the electroconvulsive therapy stimulus can have a significant impact on efficacy and cognitive side effects. The stimulus dose relative to seizure threshold was shown to significantly affect efficacy, especially for right unilateral electroconvulsive therapy, where suprathreshold doses in the vicinity of 5-6 times seizure threshold were far more efficacious than doses closer to threshold. However, this did not hold for bitemporal electroconvulsive therapy, where near-threshold stimuli were equally effective as suprathreshold stimuli. Then, changes in stimulus pulse width were found to also have a significant impact on both efficacy and side effects, with ultrabrief pulse widths of 0.3 ms having significantly fewer cognitive side effects in unilateral electroconvulsive therapy than standard brief pulse widths of 1.0 ms, with only slightly reduced efficacy. Therefore, choosing the optimum electroconvulsive therapy prescription for an individual patient now requires consideration of placement, pulse width and stimulus dose relative to seizure threshold, and how these three interact with each other. This viewpoint aims to raise awareness of these issues for psychiatrists involved in electroconvulsive therapy practice.

Psychiatric advance directives and consent to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in Australia: A legislative review and suggestions for the future.

Psychiatric Advance Directives (PADs) have been adopted in many jurisdictions around the world and in most Australian states and territories. They are seen as a less restrictive and patient-centered approach to the provision of mental health care. Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a restricted treatment in most jurisdictions in Australia and across the world. This paper explores the history, regulation and use of ECT and PADs and the intersections between them. It provides an overview of the legislative framework in each Australian state and territory and explores some of the issues which have arisen such as complexity of the regulatory framework, making PADs binding for refusing and consenting to ECT, involving treating teams in how PADs are made, using restrictive interventions to implement PADs, and the role of the Tribunal. While PADs are often framed as an important legal tool for allowing patients to refuse psychiatric treatment (especially ECT), the paper emphasizes that they can also be an innovative way for people to consent to psychiatric treatment in advance and an empowering option to access mental health care. It then makes some suggestions for future reform.

Revisiting the effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression, again.

Following on from the publication of the Royal Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry Mood Disorder Clinical Practice Guidelines (2020) and criticisms of how these aberrantly addressed repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment of depression, questions have continued to be raised in the journal about this treatment by a small group of authors, whose views we contend do not reflect the broad acceptance of this treatment nationally and internationally. In fact, the evidence supporting the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression is unambiguous and substantial, consisting of an extensive series of clinical trials supported by multiple meta-analyses, network meta-analysis and umbrella reviews. Importantly, the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression has also been subject to a series of health economic analyses. These indicate that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is a cost-effective therapy and have been used in some jurisdictions, including Australia, in support of public funding. An argument has been made that offering repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment may delay potentially effective pharmacotherapy. In fact, there is considerably greater danger of the opposite happening. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is as, if not more effective, than antidepressant medication after two unsuccessful medication trials and should be a consideration for all patients under these circumstances where available. There is no meaningful ongoing debate about the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression - it is a safe, effective and cost-effective treatment.

The place of non-invasive brain stimulation in the RANZCP clinical practice guidelines for mood disorders.

Clinical practice guidelines are important documents as they have the capacity to significantly influence and shape clinical practice in important areas of therapeutics. As such, they need to be developed informed by comprehensive and quality-based systematic reviews, involve consensus deliberations representative of the appropriate experts in the field and be subject to thorough critical review. A revised clinical practice guideline for the management of patients with mood disorders was recently published under the auspices of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists. However, this clinical practice guideline was not developed in a manner that reflects the appropriate standards that should apply to clinical practice guideline development and it has critical flaws, especially as it pertains to the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment for patients with depression. The revision of the college clinical practice guideline has explicitly removed clear and unequivocal evidence-based recommendations that were found in a previous version of the clinical practice guideline and replaced these with consensus-based recommendations. However, the consensus-based recommendations were developed without consultation of the appropriate expert body within the college and contradict the scientific literature. There is substantive and unequivocal evidence supporting the antidepressant use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in the treatment of patients with depression and its use after a patient with depression has failed a limited number (typically around two) of antidepressant medication trials. Readers should refer to the college Professional Practice Guidelines for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation published in 2018 for thorough information about the use of this important new treatment.

Patient flow from emergency department to inpatient psychiatric unit - a narrative review.

OBJECTIVE: To review the literature on common issues impacting psychiatric patient flow in emergency departments (EDs) and to explore evidence-based solutions proposed to improve patient flow. METHODS: The review was divided into three parts and a broad array of keywords were chosen to achieve greater depth in the review. Administrative data and organisational publications were included along with peer-reviewed articles in various databases. RESULTS: Psychiatric patients have increased ED length of stay (EDLOS) and the proportion of psychiatric presentations in ED has increased significantly.1 Several factors contributed to increased EDLOS. Introduction of psychiatric short stay units,2 improving patient flow3 and appropriate increase in beds were identified as some of the possible solutions to improve patient flow. CONCLUSION: Psychiatric patient flow in ED is a complex issue and needs a coordinated approach to improve access. Future studies should focus on understanding the effectiveness of some of the proposed strategies.

Electroconvulsive therapy, personal protective equipment and aerosol generating procedures: a review to guide practice during Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To review the literature on the definition of aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs), identify high-risk AGPs, guidelines to use personal protective equipment (PPE) and review evidence to see if electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a high-risk AGP requiring the use of PPE. METHODS: Existing guidelines and research data were reviewed to answer the questions. RESULTS: There is consensus about the type of anaesthesia used during ECT, what constitutes AGPs and what PPE should be used. It was not clear if ECT was an AGP, but we argue that it is one based on evidence. CONCLUSION: We conclude that ECT is an AGP and that it requires the appropriate use of PPE after taking in to account local supply and demand.

Successful rechallenge with clozapine after treatment associated eosinophilia.

OBJECTIVE: Eosinophilia has been associated with the use of clozapine. Where clozapine associated eosinophilia develops, and is associated with organ specific damage, clozapine is usually ceased. In cases of treatment associated eosinophilia without evidence of organ specific damage, clozapine would also typically be withdrawn. There are small numbers of reports in the literature describing patients who have had a successful rechallenge of clozapine having previously stopped treatment due to eosinophilia without associated organ specific inflammation. We report the case of a man who underwent a successful retrial of clozapine. METHOD: Case from authors' clinical practice reviewed. RESULTS: We present the case of a young man with treatment resistant schizophrenia who underwent a successful re-challenge of clozapine, having previously ceased treatment due to an eosinophilia associated with treatment. CONCLUSION: We believe that the current report provides further evidence that it may be unnecessary to cease treatment in all patients who develop an eosinophilia without organ dysfunction whilst on clozapine. Furthermore, where clozapine has been ceased due to an eosinophilia without evidence of organ specific inflammation, clozapine rechallenge with increased haematological monitoring should be considered.