Melissa Ertman, Emy S van der Valk Bouman, Pascal R D Clephas, Tom K Birkenhager, Markus Klimek
{"title":"电休克疗法后发作性躁动的预后因素和发生率:系统回顾与元分析》。","authors":"Melissa Ertman, Emy S van der Valk Bouman, Pascal R D Clephas, Tom K Birkenhager, Markus Klimek","doi":"10.1097/YCT.0000000000001032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Postictal agitation (PIA) is an adverse effect of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and is known to predict other side effects of ECT, but inconsistencies in the literature remain regarding PIA prognostic factors and incidence. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted (1) to identify prognostic factors for PIA following ECT and (2) to elucidate the diverse incidences of PIA following ECT based on demographic and clinical characteristics. Specifically, electronic databases were searched for retrospective observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that objectively reported PIA incidence. Additional inclusion criteria encompassed studies involving patients 18 years or older and allowed for the extraction of PIA prognostic factors. This resulted in the inclusion of 21 articles with 66,047 patients in total. A total of 35 prognostic factors were identified for PIA after ECT, consisting of 8 anesthesia-related, 19 patient-related, and 8 ECT-related prognostic factors. A meta-analysis was conducted for 7 prognostic factors. None of the prognostic factors demonstrated a significant effect on reducing or increasing PIA incidence. Mean PIA was 13.9% (18.0% adjusted) at the patient level and 12.4% (16.5% adjusted) at the session level. Overall risk of bias was generally moderate to low, except in the outcome measurement domain, where 43% of the studies had a high risk of bias. Although none of the prognostic factors in meta-analysis were significant, several other prognostic factors consistently indicated increased or decreased risk, providing direction for future research. A scarcity of (high-quality) data emphasizes the need for additional research on this topic to be conducted.</p>","PeriodicalId":54844,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Ect","volume":" ","pages":"17-26"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11895820/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prognostic Factors and Incidence for Postictal Agitation After Electroconvulsive Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Melissa Ertman, Emy S van der Valk Bouman, Pascal R D Clephas, Tom K Birkenhager, Markus Klimek\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/YCT.0000000000001032\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Postictal agitation (PIA) is an adverse effect of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and is known to predict other side effects of ECT, but inconsistencies in the literature remain regarding PIA prognostic factors and incidence. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted (1) to identify prognostic factors for PIA following ECT and (2) to elucidate the diverse incidences of PIA following ECT based on demographic and clinical characteristics. Specifically, electronic databases were searched for retrospective observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that objectively reported PIA incidence. Additional inclusion criteria encompassed studies involving patients 18 years or older and allowed for the extraction of PIA prognostic factors. This resulted in the inclusion of 21 articles with 66,047 patients in total. A total of 35 prognostic factors were identified for PIA after ECT, consisting of 8 anesthesia-related, 19 patient-related, and 8 ECT-related prognostic factors. A meta-analysis was conducted for 7 prognostic factors. None of the prognostic factors demonstrated a significant effect on reducing or increasing PIA incidence. Mean PIA was 13.9% (18.0% adjusted) at the patient level and 12.4% (16.5% adjusted) at the session level. Overall risk of bias was generally moderate to low, except in the outcome measurement domain, where 43% of the studies had a high risk of bias. Although none of the prognostic factors in meta-analysis were significant, several other prognostic factors consistently indicated increased or decreased risk, providing direction for future research. A scarcity of (high-quality) data emphasizes the need for additional research on this topic to be conducted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54844,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Ect\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"17-26\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11895820/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Ect\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/YCT.0000000000001032\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Ect","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/YCT.0000000000001032","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
摘要:发作后躁动(PIA)是电休克疗法(ECT)的一种不良反应,已知可预测 ECT 的其他副作用,但文献中关于 PIA 的预后因素和发生率仍不一致。因此,我们进行了一项系统性综述和荟萃分析:(1) 确定电休克疗法后 PIA 的预后因素;(2) 根据人口统计学和临床特征阐明电休克疗法后 PIA 的不同发病率。具体而言,研究人员在电子数据库中搜索了客观报告 PIA 发生率的回顾性观察研究和随机对照试验 (RCT)。其他纳入标准包括涉及 18 岁或以上患者的研究,并允许提取 PIA 的预后因素。因此,共纳入了 21 篇文章,涉及患者总数达 66047 人。共确定了 35 个 ECT 后 PIA 的预后因素,其中包括 8 个与麻醉相关的预后因素、19 个与患者相关的预后因素和 8 个与 ECT 相关的预后因素。对 7 个预后因素进行了荟萃分析。没有一个预后因素对减少或增加 PIA 发生率有显著影响。患者层面的平均 PIA 为 13.9%(调整后为 18.0%),疗程层面的平均 PIA 为 12.4%(调整后为 16.5%)。总体偏倚风险一般为中度至低度,但在结果测量领域,43% 的研究存在高偏倚风险。尽管在荟萃分析中,没有一个预后因素具有显著性,但其他几个预后因素始终表明风险在增加或降低,这为今后的研究提供了方向。高质量)数据的稀缺性强调了就这一主题开展更多研究的必要性。
Prognostic Factors and Incidence for Postictal Agitation After Electroconvulsive Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Abstract: Postictal agitation (PIA) is an adverse effect of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and is known to predict other side effects of ECT, but inconsistencies in the literature remain regarding PIA prognostic factors and incidence. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted (1) to identify prognostic factors for PIA following ECT and (2) to elucidate the diverse incidences of PIA following ECT based on demographic and clinical characteristics. Specifically, electronic databases were searched for retrospective observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that objectively reported PIA incidence. Additional inclusion criteria encompassed studies involving patients 18 years or older and allowed for the extraction of PIA prognostic factors. This resulted in the inclusion of 21 articles with 66,047 patients in total. A total of 35 prognostic factors were identified for PIA after ECT, consisting of 8 anesthesia-related, 19 patient-related, and 8 ECT-related prognostic factors. A meta-analysis was conducted for 7 prognostic factors. None of the prognostic factors demonstrated a significant effect on reducing or increasing PIA incidence. Mean PIA was 13.9% (18.0% adjusted) at the patient level and 12.4% (16.5% adjusted) at the session level. Overall risk of bias was generally moderate to low, except in the outcome measurement domain, where 43% of the studies had a high risk of bias. Although none of the prognostic factors in meta-analysis were significant, several other prognostic factors consistently indicated increased or decreased risk, providing direction for future research. A scarcity of (high-quality) data emphasizes the need for additional research on this topic to be conducted.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of ECT covers all aspects of contemporary electroconvulsive therapy, reporting on major clinical and research developments worldwide. Leading clinicians and researchers examine the effects of induced seizures on behavior and on organ systems; review important research results on the mode of induction, occurrence, and propagation of seizures; and explore the difficult sociological, ethical, and legal issues concerning the use of ECT.