电极位置对电休克疗法后症状、记忆和疗效维持的影响--一项比较研究

Ankit Chaudhary, Gaurav Maggu, Suprakash Chaudhury, D. Saldanha
{"title":"电极位置对电休克疗法后症状、记忆和疗效维持的影响--一项比较研究","authors":"Ankit Chaudhary, Gaurav Maggu, Suprakash Chaudhury, D. Saldanha","doi":"10.4103/ipj.ipj_131_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n The memory-related side-effects rank among the strongest reasons for hostility against Modified Electroconvulsive Therapy (MECT). Most of the studies comparing the Unilateral v/s Bilateral Electrode placements on memory have been conducted on patients with depression while very few studies have been conducted on patients with psychosis in the Indian population.\n \n \n \n To compare the effects of right unilateral (RU/L) and bilateral (B/L) MECT on the severity of symptoms as well as memory in patients with psychosis after the fourth session and two weeks after the final session of the MECT.\n \n \n \n One hundred patients having a psychotic illness were randomized into either RU/L or B/L group. Comprehensive psychopathological rating scale (CPRS), clinical global impressions scale (CGI-S), and PGI-memory scale were applied before starting of MECT, after four sessions of MECT and two weeks after the last session of ECT.\n \n \n \n The results show similar symptomatic improvement in patients receiving RU/L and B/L MECT and the results persisted beyond the therapy sessions. But, in the case of RU/L-MECT group, the deterioration in memory was less as compared to the B/L-MECT group. Both groups had no significant difference in psychopathology and its severity (CPRS and CGI). Both groups were significantly different in memory side effects after the fourth session and two weeks after the last session. Both groups showed a consistent downward trend in psychopathology and its severity. The consistent fall in the total PGI scores remained even after two weeks of the final session in the B/L group (total of six points as compared to baseline) while it came to baseline levels in the RU/L group. Both groups differed significantly in total PGI scores after the fourth session and two weeks after the final session.\n \n \n \n This study points toward a favorable outcome in the case of therapeutic response with MECT without any significant difference between both types of electrode placements and even after stopping MECT, the improvement appears to be stable over time. Although, there was a side-effect of memory impairment, it appears to be for a shorter duration and it improves with time. The side-effect profile of RU/L electrode placement is lower as compared to bilateral placement. In the post-MECT period, the patients receiving MECT with RU/L electrode placement showed better improvement in memory functions.\n","PeriodicalId":13534,"journal":{"name":"Industrial Psychiatry Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of electrode placement on symptoms, memory, and sustainment of results after electroconvulsive therapy- A comparative study\",\"authors\":\"Ankit Chaudhary, Gaurav Maggu, Suprakash Chaudhury, D. Saldanha\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/ipj.ipj_131_23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n \\n The memory-related side-effects rank among the strongest reasons for hostility against Modified Electroconvulsive Therapy (MECT). Most of the studies comparing the Unilateral v/s Bilateral Electrode placements on memory have been conducted on patients with depression while very few studies have been conducted on patients with psychosis in the Indian population.\\n \\n \\n \\n To compare the effects of right unilateral (RU/L) and bilateral (B/L) MECT on the severity of symptoms as well as memory in patients with psychosis after the fourth session and two weeks after the final session of the MECT.\\n \\n \\n \\n One hundred patients having a psychotic illness were randomized into either RU/L or B/L group. Comprehensive psychopathological rating scale (CPRS), clinical global impressions scale (CGI-S), and PGI-memory scale were applied before starting of MECT, after four sessions of MECT and two weeks after the last session of ECT.\\n \\n \\n \\n The results show similar symptomatic improvement in patients receiving RU/L and B/L MECT and the results persisted beyond the therapy sessions. But, in the case of RU/L-MECT group, the deterioration in memory was less as compared to the B/L-MECT group. Both groups had no significant difference in psychopathology and its severity (CPRS and CGI). Both groups were significantly different in memory side effects after the fourth session and two weeks after the last session. Both groups showed a consistent downward trend in psychopathology and its severity. The consistent fall in the total PGI scores remained even after two weeks of the final session in the B/L group (total of six points as compared to baseline) while it came to baseline levels in the RU/L group. Both groups differed significantly in total PGI scores after the fourth session and two weeks after the final session.\\n \\n \\n \\n This study points toward a favorable outcome in the case of therapeutic response with MECT without any significant difference between both types of electrode placements and even after stopping MECT, the improvement appears to be stable over time. Although, there was a side-effect of memory impairment, it appears to be for a shorter duration and it improves with time. The side-effect profile of RU/L electrode placement is lower as compared to bilateral placement. In the post-MECT period, the patients receiving MECT with RU/L electrode placement showed better improvement in memory functions.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":13534,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Industrial Psychiatry Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Industrial Psychiatry Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/ipj.ipj_131_23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Industrial Psychiatry Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ipj.ipj_131_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

与记忆有关的副作用是人们反对改良电休克疗法(MECT)的最主要原因之一。大多数比较单侧与双侧电极放置对记忆影响的研究都是针对抑郁症患者进行的,而针对印度人群中的精神病患者进行的研究却寥寥无几。 比较右单侧(RU/L)和双侧(B/L)MECT 对精神病患者症状严重程度和记忆力的影响,分别在第四次和最后一次 MECT 两周后进行。 100 名精神病患者被随机分为 RU/L 组和 B/L 组。在 MECT 开始前、MECT 四个疗程后和 ECT 最后一个疗程两周后,分别采用了综合精神病理评定量表(CPRS)、临床总体印象量表(CGI-S)和 PGI 记忆量表。 结果显示,接受 RU/L 和 B/L MECT 治疗的患者症状改善情况相似,并且在治疗疗程结束后仍有改善。但与 B/L-MECT 组相比,RU/L-MECT 组的记忆力衰退程度较轻。两组在精神病理学及其严重程度(CPRS 和 CGI)方面无明显差异。在第四次治疗后和最后一次治疗两周后,两组在记忆副作用方面有明显差异。两组的精神病理学及其严重程度均呈持续下降趋势。B/L 组的 PGI 总分在最后一次治疗两周后仍持续下降(与基线相比共下降了 6 分),而 RU/L 组的 PGI 总分则降至基线水平。在第四次疗程和最后一次疗程两周后,两组的 PGI 总分均有明显差异。 这项研究表明,MECT 的治疗反应结果良好,两种电极放置方式之间没有明显差异,即使在停止 MECT 后,改善情况似乎也会随着时间的推移而稳定。虽然存在记忆障碍的副作用,但持续时间较短,而且随着时间的推移会有所改善。与双侧电极放置相比,RU/L电极放置的副作用较小。在 MECT 术后,接受 MECT 并植入 RU/L 电极的患者在记忆功能方面有更好的改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effects of electrode placement on symptoms, memory, and sustainment of results after electroconvulsive therapy- A comparative study
The memory-related side-effects rank among the strongest reasons for hostility against Modified Electroconvulsive Therapy (MECT). Most of the studies comparing the Unilateral v/s Bilateral Electrode placements on memory have been conducted on patients with depression while very few studies have been conducted on patients with psychosis in the Indian population. To compare the effects of right unilateral (RU/L) and bilateral (B/L) MECT on the severity of symptoms as well as memory in patients with psychosis after the fourth session and two weeks after the final session of the MECT. One hundred patients having a psychotic illness were randomized into either RU/L or B/L group. Comprehensive psychopathological rating scale (CPRS), clinical global impressions scale (CGI-S), and PGI-memory scale were applied before starting of MECT, after four sessions of MECT and two weeks after the last session of ECT. The results show similar symptomatic improvement in patients receiving RU/L and B/L MECT and the results persisted beyond the therapy sessions. But, in the case of RU/L-MECT group, the deterioration in memory was less as compared to the B/L-MECT group. Both groups had no significant difference in psychopathology and its severity (CPRS and CGI). Both groups were significantly different in memory side effects after the fourth session and two weeks after the last session. Both groups showed a consistent downward trend in psychopathology and its severity. The consistent fall in the total PGI scores remained even after two weeks of the final session in the B/L group (total of six points as compared to baseline) while it came to baseline levels in the RU/L group. Both groups differed significantly in total PGI scores after the fourth session and two weeks after the final session. This study points toward a favorable outcome in the case of therapeutic response with MECT without any significant difference between both types of electrode placements and even after stopping MECT, the improvement appears to be stable over time. Although, there was a side-effect of memory impairment, it appears to be for a shorter duration and it improves with time. The side-effect profile of RU/L electrode placement is lower as compared to bilateral placement. In the post-MECT period, the patients receiving MECT with RU/L electrode placement showed better improvement in memory functions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
46
审稿时长
39 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信