ArticlePsychiatry investigation2024
Efficacy and Side Effects of Mixed-Strategy Electroconvulsive Therapy: A Proof-of-Concept Randomized Clinical Trial on Late Life Depression.
Article in Psychiatry investigation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivePatients with late life depression sometimes refuse to receive electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) owing to its adverse reactions. To alleviate patient's resistance, a novel ECT stimulation strategy named mixed-strategy ECT (msECT) was designed in which patients are administered conventional ECT during the first three sessions, followed by low energy stimulation during the subsequent sessions. However, whether low energy electrical stimulation in the subsequent stage of therapy affect its efficacy and reduce adverse reactions in patients with late life depression remains unknown. To explore differences between msECT and regular ECT(RECT) with respect to clinical efficacy and side effects.
methodsThis randomized, controlled trial was conducted from 2019 to 2021 on 60 patients with late life depression who were randomly assigned to two groups: RECT or msECT. A generalized estimating equation (GEE) was used to compare the two stimulation strategies regarding their efficacy and side effects on cognition. Chi-squared test was used to compare side effects in the two strategies.
resultsIn the intent-to-treat group, the GEE model suggested no differences between-group difference in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-17 score over time (Wald χ2=7.275, p=0.064), whereas the comparison of side effects in the two strategies favored msECT (Wald χ2=8.463, p=0.015) as fewer patients had adverse events during the second phase of treatment with msECT (χ2 =13.467, p=0.004).
conclusionmsECT presents its similar efficacy to RECT. msECT may have milder side effects on cognition.
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.