| Literature DB >> 27148914 |
Neeta Shenai1, Crystal D White, Pierre N Azzam, Priya Gopalan, LalithKumar K Solai.
Abstract
In cases of malignant catatonia, prompt administration of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) can decrease mortality, whereas delays to initiating ECT have resulted in adverse outcomes, including death. We present a clinical vignette of malignant catatonia that required court-ordered ECT, followed by a discussion of practical and legal obstacles to expediting emergent ECT when patients cannot provide consent. We review particularly exacting mandates for involuntary ECT from three states: California, Texas, and New York. As compared to standard practice for other clinical interventions when a patient lacks decision-making capacity, ECT is highly regulated; in some cases, these regulations can interfere with life-saving treatment.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27148914 DOI: 10.1097/HRP.0000000000000089
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Harv Rev Psychiatry ISSN: 1067-3229 Impact factor: 3.732