1.
Harv Rev Psychiatry
; 24(3): 238-41, 2016.
Artículo
en Inglés
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-27148914
RESUMEN
In cases of malignant catatonia, prompt administration of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) can decrease mortality, whereas delays to initiating ECT have resulted in adverse outcomes, including death. We present a clinical vignette of malignant catatonia that required court-ordered ECT, followed by a discussion of practical and legal obstacles to expediting emergent ECT when patients cannot provide consent. We review particularly exacting mandates for involuntary ECT from three states: California, Texas, and New York. As compared to standard practice for other clinical interventions when a patient lacks decision-making capacity, ECT is highly regulated; in some cases, these regulations can interfere with life-saving treatment.