ArticleBMC psychiatry2025
Changes in ECT services in India since the implementation of its mental health care act 2017: a clinician's perspective.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mental healthcare act and electroconvulsive therapy: Making a case for review.Indian journal of psychiatry · 2026Article
- Electroconvulsive therapy research in India: A scoping review.Indian journal of 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe large treatment gap in mental disorders in India also includes a lack of access to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), a potentially lifesaving treatment. With the introduction of the Mental Health Care Act (MHCA) 2017 in India, an impact was speculated on the utilisation of ECT due to the ban on unmodified ECT and the regularisation of ECTs in children.
methodsWe planned this survey to identify the current status of ECT services in India as perceived by psychiatrists and to explore the barriers to providing ECT, particularly those influenced by the enactment of the MHCA 2017 in India. The psychiatrists practising in India were invited to complete an online questionnaire distributed through social media and professional group forums. A total of 225 consenting participants completed the survey.
resultsA majority of the participating psychiatrists (n = 160; 71.11%) were from urban areas, and 102 (45.33%) worked in private hospitals. Approximately half of the respondents (n = 118; 52.44%) could provide ECT to less than a quarter of patients for whom ECT was recommended. Furthermore, 52.4% of psychiatrists (n = 118) reported a decrease in the number of patients receiving ECT following post MHCA 2017 in India, while 44.9% (n = 101) observed no change. Additionally, 114 psychiatrists (50.67%) noted a reduction in the use of ECT for children since MHCA 2017. A substantial proportion (78.22%; n = 176) regarded patient refusal of consent as a significant factor. Access to anaesthesia services and associated costs was identified as a major barrier by 59.1% of psychiatrists (n = 133), significantly influencing their opinion on the reduction of ECT services post-MHCA 2017 (Odds ratio = 2.024, p = 0.018).
conclusionsThe limited availability of anaesthesia services and associated expenses are significant barriers to using ECT in developing countries such as India. This issue became more pronounced after the implementation of the MHCA 2017 and should be addressed promptly. Training psychiatrists in ECT anaesthetic skills via task-sharing and telementoring can help resolve this issue.
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.