ECT efficacy and treatment course: a systematic review and meta-analysis of twice vs thrice weekly schedules.

Queensland Centre for Mental Health Research, School of Population Health, University of Queensland, Australia.
Journal of Affective Disorders (Impact Factor: 3.76). 04/2011; 138(1-2):1-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2011.03.039
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) guidelines, across various regulatory bodies, lack consensus as to the optimal frequency of treatment for individual patients. Some authors postulate that twice weekly ECT may have a similar efficacy to thrice weekly, and may have a lower risk of adverse cognitive outcomes. We did a systematic review and a meta-analysis to assess the strength of associations between ECT frequency and depression scores, duration of treatment, number of ECTs, and remission rates.
We searched on Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (to December 2009), and searched reports to identify comparative studies of frequency of ECT. We did both random-effects (RE) and quality effect (QE) meta-analyses to determine the risk of various outcomes associated with lesser frequency as compared to the thrice weekly frequency.
We analysed 8 datasets (7 articles), including 214 subjects. Twice-weekly frequency of ECT was associated with a similar change in depression score (QE model SMD -0.11 [-0.55-0.33] and RE model SMD -0.17 [-0.77-0.43]) as compared to thrice weekly ECT. The number of real ECT's trended towards fewer in the twice weekly group. There was a statistically significant longer duration of treatment with a twice weekly protocol (QE model 6.48 days [4.99-7.97] and RE model 4.78 days [0.74-8.82]). There was a statistically significant greater efficacy for thrice weekly ECT compared to once weekly ECT (QE model SMD 1.25 [-0.62-1.9] and RE model SMD 1.31 [0.6-2.02]).
Twice weekly ECT is associated with similar efficacy to thrice weekly ECT, may require fewer treatments and may be associated with longer treatment duration when compared to thrice weekly. These epidemiological observations support the routine use of twice weekly ECT in acute courses, though choice of frequency should take into account individual patient factors. These observations have implications for resource utilisation e.g. costs of duration of admission vs cost of provision of ECT, as well as issues of access to inpatient beds and anaesthetist time.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been shown to be an effective treatment for depression. However, there has been little research to determine optimal parameters for treatment. This study compared two rTMS treatment regimes for the treatment of major depression. Seventy-seven participants were randomized to either spaced or daily treatment. Spaced rTMS was given 3 days/week for 6 weeks (18 treatments in total) and daily rTMS was given 5 days/week for 4 weeks (20 treatments in total). All participants were assessed at baseline and after 4 weeks of treatment. Participants in the spaced treatment group were also assessed after 6 weeks of treatment. All participants were treated at 110% of the resting motor threshold with high-frequency rTMS (10 Hz) to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) followed by low-frequency rTMS to the right DLPFC. Participants in the daily treatment group showed more improvement by week 4 than those in the spaced treatment group; however, both groups had similar improvement by treatment completion. There was significant improvement in both groups in ratings of depression and anxiety, with no significant differences between groups. Our study indicates that the efficacy of rTMS is related to the number of treatments given and that spacing the treatments neither improves nor reduces efficacy.
    Psychological Medicine 09/2011; 42(5):981-8. · 5.59 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: To evaluate, in patients affected by an acute major depressive episode, what predictive value certain baseline psychopathological characteristics have with regard to expected therapeutic remission following biological antidepressant treatment (pharmacological/electroconvulsive; non-psychological). METHODS: Six predefined psychopathological characteristics in acute major depressive episode were evaluated using a logistic regression model through a protocolised antidepressant treatment to assess their predictive value with regard to expected remission rate. RESULTS: The final study sample consisted of 129 subjects affected by an acute major depressive episode. From the baseline evaluation of the anguish/restlessness, reduced emotional reactivity, reduced attention, reduced motor response, feeling of worthlessness, and mood characteristics items, it was possible to correctly classify 88.1% of the sample as remitter/non-remitter with sensitivity of 0.77 and specificity of 0.96. Addition of the 17-item HRSD baseline variable to the regression model increased the capacity for correct classification of the baseline sample by only 0.09%. LIMITATIONS: Protocolised antidepressant treatment was used. The results of this study may not be generalisable to pharmacological treatments not included in this protocol. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that certain baseline psychopathological characteristics (and perhaps other clinical variables too) of the acute major depressive episode may be of great use in establishing patient subgroups according to expected clinical remission to the administration of biological antidepressant treatment. This could have considerable consequences for individualised therapeutic decision-making and for future researches (clinical trials included).
    Journal of Affective Disorders 04/2013; · 3.76 Impact Factor


Available from
Oct 29, 2014