ABSTRACT
Background: The efficacy and safety of deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (dTMS) as an intervention for schizophrenia remain unclear. This systematic review examined the efficacy and safety of dTMS for schizophrenia. Methods: A systematic search of Chinese (WanFang and Chinese Journal Net) and English databases (PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library) were conducted. Results: Three randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comprising 80 patients were included in the analyses. Active dTMS was comparable to the sham treatment in improving total psychopathology, positive symptoms, negative symptoms, and auditory hallucinations measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), the Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms (SAPS), the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS), and the Auditory Hallucinations Rating Scale (AHRS), respectively. Only one RCT reported the effects on neurocognitive function measured by the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB), suggesting that dTMS may only improve one Stockings of Cambridge measure (i.e., subsequent times for five move problems). All three studies reported overall discontinuation rates, which ranged from 16.7% to 44.4%. Adverse events were reported in only one RCT, the most common being tingling/twitching (30.0%, 3/10), head/facial discomfort (30.0%, 3/10), and back pain (20.0%, 2/10). Conclusion: This systematic review suggests that dTMS does not reduce psychotic symptoms in schizophrenia, but it shows potential for improving executive functions. Future RCTs with larger sample sizes focusing on the effects of dTMS on psychotic symptoms and neurocognitive function in schizophrenia are warranted to further explore these findings.
ABSTRACT
Transnasal humidified rapid-insufflation ventilatory exchange (THRIVE) is a safe, effective, and novel technique that is currently being used in electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). This study aimed to summarize the clinical practices of THRIVE use in ECT to aid physicians and institutions in implementing the best practice guidelines for ECT. Thus, we reviewed the current literature and presented our consensus on the application of THRIVE in ECT in daily clinical practice. This consensus provides information regarding THRIVE use in ECT, including its safety, effectiveness, procedures, precautions, special case management, and application in special populations. Moreover, it guides the standardized use of THRIVE in ECT.
ABSTRACT
The efficacy and safety of deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (dTMS) in treating treatment-resistant depression (TRD) are unknown. Up to June 21, 2023, we conducted a systematic search for RCTs, and then extracted and synthesized data using random effects models. Five RCTs involving 507 patients with TRD (243 in the active dTMS group and 264 in the control group) were included in the present study. The active dTMS group showed significantly higher study-defined response rate (45.3% versus 24.2%, n = 507, risk ratio [RR] = 1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.21-2.91, I2 = 53%; P = 0.005) and study-defined remission rate (38.3% versus 14.4%, n = 507, RR = 2.37, 95%CI: 1.30-4.32, I2 = 58%; P = 0.005) and superiority in improving depressive symptoms (n = 507, standardized mean difference = -0.65, 95%CI: -1.11--0.18, I2 = 82%; P = 0.006) than the control group. In terms of cognitive functions, no significant differences were observed between the two groups. The two groups also showed similar rates of other adverse events and all-cause discontinuations (P > 0.05). dTMS is an effective and safe treatment strategy for the management of patients with TRD.
Subject(s)
Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant , Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation , Humans , Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant/therapy , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation/methods , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Objective: Intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS), which is a form of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), can produce 600 pulses to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) in a stimulation time of just over 3 min. The objective of this systematic review was to compare the safety and efficacy of iTBS and high-frequency (≥ 5 Hz) rTMS (HF-rTMS) for patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of iTBS and HF-rTMS were identified by searching English and Chinese databases. The primary outcomes were study-defined response and remission. Results: Two RCTs (n = 474) investigating the efficacy and safety of adjunctive iTBS (n = 239) versus HF-rTMS (n = 235) for adult patients with TRD met the inclusion criteria. Among the two included studies (Jadad score = 5), all were classified as high quality. No group differences were found regarding the overall rates of response (iTBS group: 48.0% versus HF-rTMS group: 45.5%) and remission (iTBS group: 30.0% versus HF-rTMS group: 25.2%; all Ps > 0.05). The rates of discontinuation and adverse events such as headache were similar between the two groups (all Ps > 0.05). Conclusion: The antidepressant effects and safety of iTBS and HF-rTMS appeared to be similar for patients with TRD, although additional RCTs with rigorous methodology are needed.
ABSTRACT
Background: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a safe and effective therapy for individuals suffering from major psychiatric disorders, but attitudes towards ECT among patients and caregivers have not been well studied. This study was conducted to elucidate patient and caregiver knowledge and attitudes concerning ECT in South China. Methods: The sample comprised 92 patients diagnosed with major psychiatric disorders and their caregivers (n = 92). Participants completed questionnaire measures of knowledge and attitudes related to ECT. Results: Information before ECT was inadequately provided to both caregivers and patients (55.4% versus 37.0%, p < 0.05). Caregivers reported receiving more adequate information about the therapeutic effects (50.0% versus 44.6%), side effects (67.4% versus 41.3%), and risks (55.4% versus 20.7%) of ECT when compared to patients (all p < 0.05). However, less than half of patients and caregivers believed that ECT was effective (43.5% versus 46.7%, p > 0.05), while more than half of them believed that ECT was beneficial (53.3% versus 71.7%, p < 0.05), and approximately half of them believed that ECT was safe (50.0% versus 51.1%, p > 0.05). A total of 32.6% of patients and 55.4% of caregivers (p < 0.05) reported that ECT was used only for critically ill patients. A total of 62.0% of patients experienced side effects, with memory impairment being the most commonly reported. Conclusion: Clinicians should develop a systematic health education program before ECT treatment and ensure that patients and caregivers have an accurate understanding of ECT, particularly the treatment process, its therapeutic effects and potential side effects prior to administering this treatment.
