Clinicians’ Approach to Cognitive Impairment After Electroconvulsive Therapy: Current Situations and Challenges

IF 0.4 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES Archives of Neuroscience Pub Date : 2022-03-02 DOI:10.5812/ans.120762
F. Mohammadian, Fattaneh Abdi-Masouleh, Zahra Hooshyari, Zahra Mirsepassi
{"title":"Clinicians’ Approach to Cognitive Impairment After Electroconvulsive Therapy: Current Situations and Challenges","authors":"F. Mohammadian, Fattaneh Abdi-Masouleh, Zahra Hooshyari, Zahra Mirsepassi","doi":"10.5812/ans.120762","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is one of the most effective treatments for severe refractory mental diseases. Widespread cognitive complications have affected the acceptance of this treatment. Despite current evidence of short-term cognitive impairment, long-term cognition consequences are less determined. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical approach of psychiatrists, psychiatry residents, and nurses in psychiatric hospitals to the necessity, method, and frequency of cognitive assessment in candidate patients for ECT. Methods: In this descriptive study, 89 professional members of Roozbeh and Razi hospitals, Tehran, Iran, including nurses, residents, and faculty members of psychiatry, were selected using the purposive sampling method. The research questionnaires were sent, and 58 fulfilled questionnaires were sent back. The data were analyzed using central indicators and statistical dispersion. The designed questionnaire included the items related to the specialists’ views on the necessity of post-ECT cognitive evaluations, best batteries, frequency of performing the tests, and other related domains. Results: After close follow-up, 58 out of 89 participants completed the questionnaires, including 17 psychiatrists (29.3%), 20 nurses (34.5%), and 21 psychiatry residents (36.2%). The results were analyzed and interpreted in detail. The average work experience of respondents in the psychiatry field was 6.89 years (range: 1 - 25 years). Additionally, 97% of the specialists did not have any project in the ECT field and cognitive disorders. More than 80% of the participants believed that cognition evaluation is necessary for ECT-candidate patients; however, only 15% of the specialists referred patients for the assessment. Moreover, 43% of the experts recommended the Wechsler Memory Scale-Revised; nevertheless, nearly 26% of the experts recommended the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System for the cognitive assessment of these patients. The Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test was recommended by 20% of the experts. Nearly two-thirds of the respondents believed that a proper assessment should be carried out in about 30 minutes. More than 60% of the experts believed that patients should be evaluated before receiving the first session of ECT, and nearly one-third of the experts recommended only a post-ECT evaluation. More than half of the experts believed that ECT should be discontinued in case of severe cognitive impairment after ECT. Alternatively, less than 30% of the experts believed that it is necessary to make changes in the treatment dose and the interval between sessions. Furthermore, 80% of the experts recommended cognitive rehabilitation for patients with significant cognitive impairment after ECT; nonetheless, less than 20% of the experts recommended treatment with a cholinesterase inhibitor. Conclusions: A large percentage of patients do not undergo a comprehensive cognitive assessment after ECT, which is an important challenge in the estimation of post-ECT cognitive decline. There is a need to design inexpensive and sensitive tests for cognitive assessment. The test could measure different cognitive domains and be acceptable in terms of time. Due to the limited number of specialists working in this field, the frequency of assessment and treatment methods after the identification of cognitive disorders are heterogeneous. Therefore, it is required to design a native and practical guideline. These results could help the researchers design future studies to determine the best method of cognitive evaluation after ECT, appropriate batteries, recommended intervals, and treatment decisions after cognitive decline detection.","PeriodicalId":43970,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Neuroscience","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5812/ans.120762","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is one of the most effective treatments for severe refractory mental diseases. Widespread cognitive complications have affected the acceptance of this treatment. Despite current evidence of short-term cognitive impairment, long-term cognition consequences are less determined. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical approach of psychiatrists, psychiatry residents, and nurses in psychiatric hospitals to the necessity, method, and frequency of cognitive assessment in candidate patients for ECT. Methods: In this descriptive study, 89 professional members of Roozbeh and Razi hospitals, Tehran, Iran, including nurses, residents, and faculty members of psychiatry, were selected using the purposive sampling method. The research questionnaires were sent, and 58 fulfilled questionnaires were sent back. The data were analyzed using central indicators and statistical dispersion. The designed questionnaire included the items related to the specialists’ views on the necessity of post-ECT cognitive evaluations, best batteries, frequency of performing the tests, and other related domains. Results: After close follow-up, 58 out of 89 participants completed the questionnaires, including 17 psychiatrists (29.3%), 20 nurses (34.5%), and 21 psychiatry residents (36.2%). The results were analyzed and interpreted in detail. The average work experience of respondents in the psychiatry field was 6.89 years (range: 1 - 25 years). Additionally, 97% of the specialists did not have any project in the ECT field and cognitive disorders. More than 80% of the participants believed that cognition evaluation is necessary for ECT-candidate patients; however, only 15% of the specialists referred patients for the assessment. Moreover, 43% of the experts recommended the Wechsler Memory Scale-Revised; nevertheless, nearly 26% of the experts recommended the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System for the cognitive assessment of these patients. The Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test was recommended by 20% of the experts. Nearly two-thirds of the respondents believed that a proper assessment should be carried out in about 30 minutes. More than 60% of the experts believed that patients should be evaluated before receiving the first session of ECT, and nearly one-third of the experts recommended only a post-ECT evaluation. More than half of the experts believed that ECT should be discontinued in case of severe cognitive impairment after ECT. Alternatively, less than 30% of the experts believed that it is necessary to make changes in the treatment dose and the interval between sessions. Furthermore, 80% of the experts recommended cognitive rehabilitation for patients with significant cognitive impairment after ECT; nonetheless, less than 20% of the experts recommended treatment with a cholinesterase inhibitor. Conclusions: A large percentage of patients do not undergo a comprehensive cognitive assessment after ECT, which is an important challenge in the estimation of post-ECT cognitive decline. There is a need to design inexpensive and sensitive tests for cognitive assessment. The test could measure different cognitive domains and be acceptable in terms of time. Due to the limited number of specialists working in this field, the frequency of assessment and treatment methods after the identification of cognitive disorders are heterogeneous. Therefore, it is required to design a native and practical guideline. These results could help the researchers design future studies to determine the best method of cognitive evaluation after ECT, appropriate batteries, recommended intervals, and treatment decisions after cognitive decline detection.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
临床医生治疗电休克后认知障碍的方法:现状和挑战
背景:电休克治疗是治疗严重难治性精神疾病最有效的方法之一。广泛的认知并发症影响了这种治疗的接受度。尽管目前有短期认知障碍的证据,但长期认知后果尚不确定。目的:本研究旨在评估精神科医师、精神科住院医师和精神科护士对ECT候选者进行认知评估的必要性、方法和频率的临床方法。方法:采用目的抽样方法,选取伊朗德黑兰Roozbeh和Razi医院的89名专业人员,包括护士、住院医师和精神病学教员。发放研究问卷,回收完成问卷58份。采用中心指标和统计离散度对数据进行分析。设计的问卷包括专家对ect后认知评估的必要性、最佳电池、进行测试的频率和其他相关领域的看法。结果:89名被调查者中有58人完成问卷,其中精神科医生17人(29.3%),护士20人(34.5%),精神科住院医师21人(36.2%)。对实验结果进行了详细的分析和解释。被调查者在精神病学领域的平均工作经验为6.89年(范围:1 - 25年)。此外,97%的专家在电痉挛领域和认知障碍方面没有任何项目。超过80%的参与者认为认知评估对ect候选者是必要的;然而,只有15%的专家推荐患者进行评估。此外,43%的专家推荐使用韦氏记忆量表;然而,近26%的专家推荐使用Delis-Kaplan执行功能系统对这些患者进行认知评估。雷伊听觉语言学习测试是由20%的专家推荐的。近三分之二的受访者认为,适当的评估应在30分钟左右进行。超过60%的专家认为患者应该在接受第一次ECT之前进行评估,近三分之一的专家建议只进行ECT后评估。超过一半的专家认为,如果电痉挛治疗后出现严重的认知障碍,应该停止电痉挛治疗。另外,不到30%的专家认为有必要改变治疗剂量和疗程间隔。此外,80%的专家建议对ECT后存在明显认知障碍的患者进行认知康复治疗;尽管如此,只有不到20%的专家建议使用胆碱酯酶抑制剂进行治疗。结论:很大比例的患者在ECT后没有进行全面的认知评估,这是评估ECT后认知能力下降的一个重要挑战。有必要设计廉价和敏感的认知评估测试。这个测试可以测量不同的认知领域,在时间上是可以接受的。由于在这一领域工作的专家数量有限,认知障碍识别后的评估频率和治疗方法各不相同。因此,需要设计一个本地和实用的指南。这些结果可以帮助研究人员设计未来的研究,以确定ECT后认知评估的最佳方法,适当的电池,推荐的间隔时间,以及认知衰退检测后的治疗决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Archives of Neuroscience
Archives of Neuroscience NEUROSCIENCES-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Archives of neuroscience is a clinical and basic journal which is informative to all practitioners like Neurosurgeons, Neurologists, Psychiatrists, Neuroscientists. It is the official journal of Brain and Spinal Injury Research Center. The Major theme of this journal is to follow the path of scientific collaboration, spontaneity, and goodwill for the future, by providing up-to-date knowledge for the readers. The journal aims at covering different fields, as the name implies, ranging from research in basic and clinical sciences to core topics such as patient care, education, procuring and correct utilization of resources and bringing to limelight the cherished goals of the institute in providing a standard care for the physically disabled patients. This quarterly journal offers a venue for our researchers and scientists to vent their innovative and constructive research works. The scope of the journal is as far wide as the universe as being declared by the name of the journal, but our aim is to pursue our sacred goals in providing a panacea for the intractable ailments, which leave a psychological element in the daily life of such patients. This authoritative clinical and basic journal was founded by Professor Madjid Samii in 2012.
期刊最新文献
Effect of Propofol and Isoflurane on Postoperative Cognitive Dysfunction Following Elective Laminectomy Surgery in Adult Elderly Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial Study Evaluation of the Prevalence and Predictive Factors of Post-COVID Cognitive Disorders Among Iranian COVID-19 Recuperated Individuals: A Bayesian Analysis Comparison of Ketamine to Haloperidol for Preventing Delirium in ICU Elderly Patients Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome in a Hospitalized Pregnant Woman with SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Case Report Facial and Cochlear Nerves Outcomes in the Surgical Resection of Giant Vestibular Schwannoma: Is There Any Predictive Value for Intraoperative Neuromonitoring of the Facial Nerve?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1