Electroconvulsive Therapy Across Nations: A 2022 Survey of Practice.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to characterize worldwide electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) practice and compare practice across nations and global regions. METHOD: Our anonymous survey was open on SurveyMonkey.com from January to June 2022. We sent invitations to providers identified using a Medicare provider database, an advanced PubMed search function, and professional group listservs. Participants were instructed to submit one survey per ECT site. Response frequencies were pooled by global region and compared using nonparametric methods. RESULTS: Responses came from 126 sites, mostly in the United States (59%, n = 74), Europe (18%, n = 23), Canada (10%, n = 12), and South/East Asia (6%, n = 8). With some exceptions, sites were broadly consistent in practice as indicated by: a likely shift internationally from bitemporal to right unilateral electrode placement; predominant use of pulse widths <1 ms; preference for seizure threshold titration over age-based dosing methods; widespread availability of continuation/maintenance ECT (97%); and frequent use of quantitative outcome measures for depressive symptoms (88%) and cognitive adverse effects (80%). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first, published survey that aimed to characterize worldwide ECT practice. With some exceptions, responses suggest a concordance in practice. However, responses were primarily from the Global North. To obtain a truly worldwide characterization of practice, future surveys should include more responses from the Global South.

Electroconvulsive Therapy in the United States: A 2022 Survey of Practice.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to describe current US electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) practice, identify practice changes over time, and inform discussion of practice. METHOD: Our anonymous survey was open on SurveyMonkey.com from January to June 2022. We sent invitations to providers identified using a Medicare provider database, an advanced PubMed search function, and professional group listservs. Participants were instructed to submit 1 survey per ECT site. We examined frequency of responses, tabulated individual comments, and grouped data for comparison. RESULTS: We received responses from 74 US practice sites encompassing 283 providers. Forty-nine percent (n = 36) of respondents practiced at general academic medical centers, 23% (n = 17) at general medical centers, 16% (n = 12) at freestanding psychiatric hospitals, and 7% (n = 5) at Veterans Affairs medical centers. Proportions of female (29%) and Black or African American (AA) (1%) ECT providers were markedly lower than proportions of female (60%) and Black or African American ECT patients (10%). The median number of treatments for a major depressive episode was 10. The preferred electrode placement was right unilateral (66%, n = 45). The favored dosing strategy was seizure threshold titration. Quantitative outcome measures were used by 89% (n = 66) of sites for depressive symptoms and 84% (n = 62) for cognitive adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: This survey is the first nationwide survey of ECT practice in nearly 40 years. Our results describe changes in practice over time and highlight the need to increase the number of female and Black or African American ECT providers. A comprehensive network of ECT sites could facilitate more frequent nationwide surveys.

Distinguishing Convulsive Syncope From Seizure Induced by Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: A Case Report.

ABSTRACT: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is Food and Drug Administration cleared for clinical use in treatment-resistant depression and a growing list of other disorders. The clinical uptake of rTMS has been facilitated by its relatively benign adverse-effect profile compared with other treatment modalities. Seizure is a rare but serious adverse event that has been reported with rTMS, when dosage exceeds safety guidelines or in individuals at increased risk for seizure. Fortunately, most rTMS-induced seizures are typically transient, with no adverse sequelae, but they may lead to treatment discontinuation. Seizure is not the only cause of loss of conscious and abnormal movements induced by rTMS. Convulsive syncope, a more common adverse event that involves loss of consciousness associated with myoclonic movements, can be difficult to differentiate from an rTMS-induced seizure. We report the case of a 52-year-old man with no known seizure risk factors, enrolled in an institutional review board-approved research study who developed what appeared to be a convulsive syncopal episode lasting 10 to 15 seconds during day 2 of a 30-day rTMS protocol (10 Hz, 120% of motor threshold, 4-second pulse train, 26-second intertrain interval, 3000 pulses per session), with no adverse sequelae. The patient's history, screening, physical examination, pertinent laboratory, neurology consult, electroencephalogram, and imaging findings are discussed. This case demonstrates that distinguishing between convulsive syncope and rTMS-induced seizure can be a diagnostic challenge. Clinicians and researchers delivering rTMS should be familiar with the risk factors for rTMS-induced seizures and rTMS-induced convulsive syncope, to screen for predisposing factors and to manage these rare adverse events if they occur.