Diana S Rose1, Til H Wykes, Jonathan P Bindman, Pete S Fleischmann. 1. Service User Research Enterprise, PO 34, Health Services Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, De Crespigny Park, Denmark Hill, London SE5 8AF, UK. d.rose@iop.kcl.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a procedure that attracts special safeguards under common law for voluntary patients and under both current and proposed mental health legislation, for those receiving compulsory treatment. AIMS: To review patients' views on issues of information, consent and perceived coercion. METHOD: Seventeen papers and reports were identified that dealt with patients' views on information and consent in relation to ECT; 134 'testimonies' or first-hand accounts were identified. The papers and reports were subjected to a descriptive systematic review. The testimony data were analysed qualitatively. RESULTS: Approximately half the patients reported that they had received sufficient information about ECT and side-effects. Approximately a third did not feel they had freely consented to ECT even when they had signed a consent form. Clinician-led research evaluates these findings to mean that patients trust their doctors, whereas user-led work evaluates similar findings as showing inadequacies in informed consent. CONCLUSION: Neither current nor proposed safeguards for patients are sufficient to ensure informed consent with respect to ECT, at least in England and Wales.
BACKGROUND: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a procedure that attracts special safeguards under common law for voluntarypatients and under both current and proposed mental health legislation, for those receiving compulsory treatment. AIMS: To review patients' views on issues of information, consent and perceived coercion. METHOD: Seventeen papers and reports were identified that dealt with patients' views on information and consent in relation to ECT; 134 'testimonies' or first-hand accounts were identified. The papers and reports were subjected to a descriptive systematic review. The testimony data were analysed qualitatively. RESULTS: Approximately half the patients reported that they had received sufficient information about ECT and side-effects. Approximately a third did not feel they had freely consented to ECT even when they had signed a consent form. Clinician-led research evaluates these findings to mean that patients trust their doctors, whereas user-led work evaluates similar findings as showing inadequacies in informed consent. CONCLUSION: Neither current nor proposed safeguards for patients are sufficient to ensure informed consent with respect to ECT, at least in England and Wales.
Entities:
Keywords:
Empirical Approach; Mental Health Therapies; Professional Patient Relationship
Authors: Andreea Raluca Tirintica; Ivana Andjelkovic; Orela Sota; Mihail Cristian Pirlog; Maria Stoyanova; Adriana Mihai; Neal Wallace Journal: Int J Ment Health Syst Date: 2018-12-07
Authors: James Mugisha; Charlotte Hanlon; Birthe Loa Knizek; Joshua Ssebunnya; Davy Vancampfort; Eugene Kinyanda; Fred Kigozi Journal: Int J Ment Health Syst Date: 2019-09-06
Authors: Yasser Khazaal; Rita Manghi; Marie Delahaye; Ariella Machado; Louise Penzenstadler; Andrew Molodynski Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2014-04-29