Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31772436›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of psychological medicine

A Focus Group Study of Indian Psychiatrists' Views on Electroconvulsive Therapy under India's Mental Healthcare Act 2017: 'The Ground Reality is Different'.

Richard M Duffy, Gautam Gulati, Vasudeo Paralikar, Niket Kasar, Nishant Goyal, Avinash Desousa, Brendan D Kelly

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of psychological medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Richard M DuffyDepartment of Psychiatry, Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Centre for Health Sciences, Tallaght University Hospital, Tallaght, Dublin 24, D24 NR0A, Ireland.
Gautam GulatiDepartment of Psychiatry, Graduate Entry Medical School, University of Limerick, Ireland.
Vasudeo ParalikarDepartment of Psychiatry, KEM Hospital Research Centre, Pune, India.
Niket KasarDepartment of Psychiatry, KEM Hospital Research Centre, Pune, India.
Nishant GoyalDepartment of Psychiatry, Academic Section, Central Institute of Psychiatry, Ranchi, Jharkhand, India.
Avinash DesousaDepartment of Psychiatry, Lokmanya Tilak Municipal General Hospital and Medical College, Mumbai, India.
Brendan D KellyDepartment of Psychiatry, Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Centre for Health Sciences, Tallaght University Hospital, Tallaght, Dublin 24, D24 NR0A, Ireland.
Trinity College Dublin · IECentral Institute of Psychiatry · INLokmanya Tilak Municipal General Hospital and Lokmanya Tilak Municipal Medical College · INUniversity of Limerick · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIndia's Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 (MHCA) greatly restricts the use of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in minors and bans unmodified ECT. Indian psychiatrists have raised concerns that these measures may deprive certain patients of life-saving treatment. This study describes the perspectives of Indian psychiatrists on how ECT is dealt with in the legislation.

methodsWe conducted nine focus groups in three Indian states. We explored the positive and negative implications of the MHCA and discussed its implementation, especially in relation to ECT.

resultsMany of the themes and concerns commonly discussed in relation to ECT in other jurisdictions are readily apparent among Indian psychiatrists, although perspectives on specific issues remain heterogeneous. The one area of near-universal agreement is Indian psychiatrists' affirmation of the effectiveness of ECT. We identified three main areas of current concern: the MHCA's ban on unmodified ECT, ECT in minors, and ECT in the acute phase. Two broad additional themes also emerged: resource limitations and the impact of nonmedical models of mental health. We identified a need for greater education about the MHCA among all stakeholders.

conclusionCore concerns about ECT in India's new legislation relate, in part, to medical decisions apparently being taken out of the hands of psychiatrists and change being driven by theoretical perspectives that do not reflect "ground realities." Although the MHCA offers significant opportunities, failure to resource its ambitious changes will greatly limit the use of ECT in India.

Indexed as

a) Indian psychiatrists have grave concerns about legislative restrictions on ECT and mental health resource limitations. b) There is a need for greater education about the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 among all stakeholders, not least because failure to resource its ambitious changes will greatly limit ECT in India.Electroconvulsive therapyhuman rightsIndiajurisprudencemental health legislation

Identifiers

PMID31772436
PMCPMC6875845
OpenAlexW2986721502

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.