Electroshock o Terapia Electroconvulsiva (TEC) en Chile: Diagnóstico crítico, activismo social y enfoque de derechos / Electroshock or Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT) in Chile: Critical diagnosis, social activism and human rights approach

El electroshock o Terapia Electroconvulsiva (TEC) es un procedimiento controversial desde una mi-rada ética y científica. Organizaciones en primera persona del ámbito de la salud mental han generado un debate público respecto a su uso, señalado que es un procedimiento severamente invasivo con efectos dañinos en el cerebro. En ese contexto, el presente artículo realiza una revisión crítica del uso de esta práctica en el campo de la psiquiatría. Junto con ello, describe un panorama general del marco institucional en que se realiza la Terapia Electro-convulsiva (TEC) en Chile. Finalmente, examina los fundamentos e implicancias del enfoque de derechos para una mayor regulación o absoluta prohibición de este procedimiento

Electroshock or Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT) is a controversial procedure from an ethical and scientific perspective. Organizations led by users and ex users in the field of mental health have generated a public debate regarding its use, pointing out that it is a severely invasive procedure with harmful effects on the brain. In that context, this article critically re-views the use of this practice in the field of psychiatry. In addition, it describes an overview of the institutional framework in which Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT) is performed in Chile. Finally, it examines the fundamentals and implications of the perspective of human rights for a greater regulation or absolute prohibition of this procedure

Insight and capacity to consent to electroconvulsive therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To critically examine a recent decision of the Victorian Supreme Court that found that the Mental Health Tribunal and the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal erred in the application of the capacity test in the Mental Health Act 2014 (Vic) and that compulsory electroconvulsive therapy would infringe upon the human rights of two patients who had no insight into their chronic schizophrenia. CONCLUSIONS: After considering the concepts of insight and capacity to consent to treatment, the paper concludes that the decision in NJE and PBU v Mental Health Tribunal [2018] VSC 564 is problematic clinically.

Hip Hip Hooray, ECT turns 80!

OBJECTIVE:: This paper reviews the history of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) with an emphasis on the Australian context over the past 30 years. The review includes data collection, the contribution of the RANZCP, and changes in legislation. CONCLUSION:: ECT remains the most effective treatment for severe depression. Since the 1950s efforts have been made to make it more effective, tolerable and acceptable. Over the same period, significant social and political forces have acted to have the practice of ECT restricted or banned. Psychiatrists, through the RANZCP and other bodies, have the responsibility to promote quality ECT practice, advocate for patients, carers, and clinicians, counter inaccurate negative portrayals, and lobby for balanced legislation for ECT and other neurostimulation.

Pathway to Electroconvulsive Treatment for Minors.

The decision-making process of prescribing electroconvulsive treatment (ECT) to minors often extends outside of medicine. The legal arena is commonly involved in many jurisdictions, and some states have legislation governing the administration of this treatment in addition to hospital policies and regulations. Treatment failures, additional opinions, explicit consent, and legal tribunals are sometimes needed to deliver ECT to a minor in need. This article describes a process to which a provider can refer in navigating this confusing, and sometimes alien, pathway to provide ECT to his or her patient. Individual state statutes pertaining to ECT are provided.

[Treatment against the patient's will exemplified by electroconvulsive therapy : Clinical, legal and ethical aspects]. / Behandlung gegen den natürlichen Willen am Beispiel der Elektrokonvulsionstherapie : Klinische, juristische und ethische Aspekte.

BACKGROUND: Severe affective and psychotic disorders may be accompanied by legal incapacity. If in this case the patient refuses treatment and in parallel there is a risk of serious damage to health, treatment can be carried out against the patient's non-autonomous will under defined prerequisites. Due to its good and partly superior effectiveness in the treatment of severe and pharmacotherapy-resistant affective and psychotic disorders, electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is an important treatment option in such constellations. AIM: Description of the general principles and prerequisites of therapeutic measures against the patient's will. METHODS: Based on a case report, the application of ECT as a medical measure against the patient's will is discussed and assessed in an interdisciplinary approach from clinical, legal, and ethical perspectives. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The (empirical) evidence on the general effectiveness of ECT, as well as its application against the will of patients with legal incapacity, clearly shows a positive benefit-risk ratio. When performed against the patient's will, ECT as all compulsory medical interventions, represents a severe encroachment on the individual's fundamental rights of both physical integrity and self-determination. Nevertheless, its application may be medically indicated, legally admissible and ethically appropriate in individual cases to prevent the threat of serious damage to the patient's health. Ethical and legal prerequisites of treatment against the patient's will should be evaluated by a multiprofessional team and the patient's legal guardian should be involved from an early stage.

Regulation of Electroconvulsive Therapy: A Systematic Review of US State Laws.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to systematically review current US state laws on electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in order to provide a comprehensive resource to educate practitioners, potential patients, and lawmakers. METHODS: Individual state legislative Web sites were searched by 2 independent authors using the following search terms: "electroconvulsive therapy," "convulsive therapy," "electroconvulsant therapy," "electroshock therapy," and "shock therapy" from March 2017 to May 2017. All sections of state law pertaining to ECT were reviewed, and pertinent data regarding consent, age restrictions, treatment limitations, required reporting, defined qualified professionals, fees, and other information were extracted. RESULTS: State regulation on ECT widely varied from none to stringent requirements. There were 6 states without any laws pertaining to ECT. California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Texas were noted to be the most regulatory on ECT. CONCLUSIONS: There are no US national laws on ECT leaving individual state governments to regulate treatment. Whereas some states have detailed restrictions on use, other states have no regulation at all. This variation applies to multiple areas of ECT practice, including who can receive ECT, who can provide informed consent, who can prescribe or perform ECT, and what administrative requirements (eg, fees, reporting) must be met by ECT practitioners. Knowledge of these state laws will help providers not only to be aware of their own state's regulations, but also to have a general awareness of what other states mandate for better patient care and utilization of ECT.

Neurological Devices; Reclassification of Electroconvulsive Therapy Devices; Effective Date of Requirement for Premarket Approval for Electroconvulsive Therapy Devices for Certain Specified Intended Uses. Final order.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing a final order to reclassify the electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) device for use in treating catatonia or a severe major depressive episode (MDE) associated with major depressive disorder (MDD) or bipolar disorder (BPD) in patients age 13 years and older who are treatment-resistant or who require a rapid response due to the severity of their psychiatric or medical condition, which is a preamendments class III device, into class II (special controls). FDA is also issuing this final order to require the filing of a premarket approval application (PMA) or a notice of completion of a product development protocol (PDP) for the preamendments class III ECT devices for all other uses that are not being reclassified to class II (product code GXC).

[Electroconvulsive therapy in nonconsenting patients]. / Elektrokonvulsionstherapie gegen den natürlichen Patientenwillen.

BACKGROUND: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a potent and successful method for the treatment of severe psychiatric disorders. Severe depressive and psychotic disorders may lead to legal incapacity and inability to consent. In Germany, administration of ECT against the patient's will is feasible under certain constellations and is regulated under the terms of the guardianship law. OBJECTIVE: This article outlines the prevalence, effectiveness and tolerability of ECT when applied in nonconsenting patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Case report and literature review. RESULTS: The literature on ECT as a treatment in nonconsenting patients is relatively sparse. In 2008 the prevalence in Germany was less than 0.5 % of all patients receiving ECT. Case reports and case series suggest a good and equal level of effectiveness when compared to consenting patients. In the course of treatment the majority of patients consented to receive further ECT and retrospectively judged ECT as helpful. CONCLUSION: The use of ECT is a highly effective treatment in severe psychiatric disorders even when administered as treatment in nonconsenting patients. It can be lifesaving and lead to a rapid improvement of symptoms and relief from severe suffering also from the patients' perspective. Thus, it seems unethical not to consider ECT as a treatment against the nonautonomous will of legally incompetent patients in individual cases. Nevertheless, physicians should always seek to obtain the patients' consent as soon as possible for both legal and ethical reasons.

Practical and Legal Challenges to Electroconvulsive Therapy in Malignant Catatonia.

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.

Electroconvulsive Therapy in Italy: Will Public Controversies Ever Stop?

BACKGROUND: The use of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is still very limited in Italy for ideological rather than scientific reasons. OBJECTIVES: To describe the public controversies surrounding ECT in Italy and to propose a plan of action to resolve the dispute. METHODS: We describe the historical background and the current public controversies about ECT by reviewing the official documents issued by the entities involved in the debate and by reporting our personal experiences of ECT practice. RESULTS: According to the highest legal and health authorities, there are no ethical reasons for doubting the licit nature of ECT. However, because of politically and ideologically based conflicts, public ECT centers are still lacking. The situation could further deteriorate because local initiatives are endeavoring to criminalize and ban the treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The enactment of specific regulations and guidelines concerning the use of ECT by the Italian government is highly warranted to increase the availability of the treatment. Education and information campaigns must strive to increase the knowledge of health professionals and the lay public regarding the safe and beneficial use of ECT.

Informed Consent for Electroconvulsive Therapy--Finding Balance.

Informed consent underpins all medical decisions, including the decision to undergo electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). Written informed consent remains the standard before the initiation of ECT and requires the inclusion of several components to be considered valid. Prospective patients must be aware of risks and benefits of ECT as well as risks and benefits of alternate, and potentially less effective, interventions. Patients must also possess adequate decision-making capacity to make an informed choice about treatment. Consent for ECT may present unique issues, such as the interplay between potential cognitive adverse effects and informed consent. Options to address this concern include thorough explanation of this topic before the initiation of ECT, continued reassessment of consent during ECT, or some combination of approaches.

Court-Approved Electroconvulsive Therapy in Patients Unable to Provide Their Own Consent: A Case Series.

For patients who lack capacity to consent to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) for various reasons (intellectual disability, severe mental illness, dementia, etc), court approval must be obtained to proceed with the treatments. We reviewed our experiences on a busy tertiary center ECT service in which we have treated 24 patients in recent years under the auspices of court approval for consent. We found that these patients generally tolerated the treatments well and had noticeable improvement in their symptoms as well as overall better quality of life. In particular, although the patients were unable to provide their own consent for ECT, they were amenable to receive the treatments and did not seem resistant or hostile to the treatment process. We conclude that, in patients unable to provide their own consent, court-approved ECT is well tolerated.

Electroconvulsive Therapy Malpractice: Verdict for the Defense.

OBJECTIVES: Malpractice cases involving electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) are rare. Even rarer are those malpractice cases alleging ECT-related brain damage. The few cases of ECT malpractice lawsuits are not described in the medical literature in detail. METHODS: We provide a detailed account of a case of a patient and subsequent alleged ECT-related malpractice. The details of the case were collated using the handwritten notes of one of the authors who was present at the trial and the pretrial documents of discovery that were entered into evidence. RESULTS: The plaintiff alleged complete autobiographical amnesia after ECT, supposedly as a result of ECT-related brain damage. The defense was aided by the presence of extensive neurological examination and brain imaging both before and after ECT. The defense team also offered to the jury the concept of "dissociative amnesia" as an alternative explanation for the plaintiff's memory complaints. The case went to trial and was successfully defended. DISCUSSION: Electroconvulsive therapy malpractice cases alleging brain damage can be successfully defended, and the successful defense is aided by adequate documentation before, during, and after ECT. CONCLUSIONS: Malpractice cases, especially if they are baseless, can occur unpredictably, but they can be defended if the medical documentation is thorough.

Emergency ECT in an incapacitated, medically compromised patient with Huntington's disease.

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is infrequently considered an "emergency" medical procedure; however, there are certain conditions in which there is considerable urgency to initiate ECT. For example, prompt administration of ECT to treat neuroleptic malignant syndrome and malignant catatonia is necessary to improve a patient's overall prognosis and potentially save the patient's life. In this case, a 57-year-old woman with Huntington's disease was admitted to our medical intensive care unit for failure to thrive due to severe psychotic symptoms. Prior to her admission, the patient had become increasingly psychotic and agitated, resulting in her refusal and/or inability to eat. Efforts to treat her severe psychiatric and behavioral symptoms with various psychopharmacological strategies were largely unsuccessful. As the patient's physical health continued to decline, with loss of approximately 35 pounds over 2 months, her family began making arrangements to transfer her to a hospice facility. The day before she was to be transferred, the psychiatry consultation-liaison service recommended ECT. Unfortunately, this recommendation was complicated because the patient was unable to provide consent. This case report describes the legal and administrative process used to ethically and legally administer ECT without consent from the patient or a court-appointed guardian in order to treat a life-threatening condition. To the best of our knowledge, this report documents the first time ECT has been granted "medical emergency" status in Texas.

Unmodified electroconvulsive therapy: a false dilemma.

A recent statement commissioned by the Indian Association of Private Psychiatry recommends that unmodified electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) should still be used in some settings in India, invoking the principle of beneficence. This paper critically analyses the IAPP statement in terms of both scientific accuracy and ethical principles. It is found that the statement falls short of the ethical principles of beneficence, non-maleficence and justice. It is the duty of psychiatrists and psychiatric associations to offer the best available care to their patients, both on scientific and ethical grounds.