ArticleSAGE open medicine2022
Management and outcomes of catatonia: A prospective study in urban South Africa.
Article in SAGE open medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Narrative Review of Catatonia in Psychosis and Eating Disorders: Common Intersections and Treatment Considerations.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Rapid intervention for catatonia with benzodiazepines and electroconvulsive therapy can prevent fatal complications. We describe the management and treatment response of 44 patients with catatonia in a psychiatric unit in urban South Africa. The objective was to screen admissions for catatonia and investigate management, treatment response, and treatment outcomes. Method: We used a prospective, descriptive, observational study design and collected data using a data collection sheet, the Bush Francis Catatonia Screening Instrument, the Bush Francis Catatonia Rating Scale, and the Results: Of the 241 participants screened on admission, 44 (18.3% of 241) screened positive for catatonia on the Bush Francis Catatonia Screening Instrument, while 197 (81.7% of 241) did not. Thirty-eight (86.4% of 44) received lorazepam, seven (15.9%) received clonazepam, and two (4.6%) received diazepam, implying that three (6.8%) of the 44 participants with catatonia received more than one benzodiazepine sequentially. Ten (22.7% of 44) patients received electroconvulsive therapy. Seven of those treated with electroconvulsive therapy (15.9% of 44 and 70% of 10) responded well and were discharged, whereas 22 (50% of 44 and 64.7% of 34) of those given lorazepam were discharged. Patients treated with electroconvulsive therapy had a higher initial Bush Francis Catatonia Rating Scale score. One patient (2.3%) relapsed within 4 weeks of discharge. Twenty (45.5%) of the 44 patients with catatonia had low average iron levels, 14 (31.8%) had low vitamin B12, and 24 (54.6%) had high creatinine kinase. Conclusion: Both lorazepam and electroconvulsive therapy were found to be effective treatments for catatonia with good response and outcomes. The length of hospital stay of patients with catatonia was similar to that of patients without catatonia. Treatment guidelines for catatonia need to include the role and timing of electroconvulsive therapy to augment current treatment protocols for the use of lorazepam.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.