Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-5r2nc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T08:45:24.308Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prognostic Factors in the Electroshock Treatment of Depressive States

I.—Clinical Features from History and Examination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2018

Julian M. Roberts
Julian M. Roberts*
Affiliation:
University of Leeds and the United Leeds Hospitals
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Since its introduction in 1938 electroshock therapy (E.C.T.) has become probably the most widely applied form of physical treatment in psychiatry, despite the fact that its method and site of action are still not precisely known. Numerous investigations have been undertaken to delineate more clearly the indications for its use; notwithstanding broad agreement as to its value in depressive states and some schizophrenic syndromes there is still a paucity of evidence on which firm criteria for the prediction of outcome to treatment can be based. Most prognostic studies appeared in the first decade following the introduction of E.C.T. and were based largely on empirical clinical observations during the course of routine psychiatric practice, whereas later investigations have included more intensive and precise researches into possible psychological, physiological, biochemical and pharmacological indices of capacity to respond to electroshock.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Mental Science , Volume 105 , Issue 440 , July 1959 , pp. 693 - 702
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1959 

References

Alexander, G. H., J. Nerv. and Ment. Dis., 1945, 102, 221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, E. W., J. Ment. Sci., 1936, 82, 559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elithorn, A., “Report”, Brit. med. J., 1958, ii, 1470.Google Scholar
Garmany, G., ibid., 1958, ii, 341.Google Scholar
Gildea, E. F., Kahn, E., and Man, E. B., Amer. J. Psychiat., 1936, 92, 1247.Google Scholar
Idem , Man, E. B., and Biach, R. W., Arch. Neurol. and Psychiat., 1940, 43, 932.Google Scholar
Idem , and Man, E. B., Amer. J. Psychiat., 1943, 99, 496.Google Scholar
Hamilton, M., 1959. In press.Google Scholar
Hobson, R. F., J. Neurol. Neurosurg. and Psychiat., 1953, 16, 275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, A. J., J. Ment. Sci., 1934, 80, 277.Google Scholar
Idem , ibid., 1936, 82, 488.Google Scholar
Malamud, W., Sands, S. L., and Malamud, I., Psychosom. Med., 1941, 3, 410.Google Scholar
Mayer-Gross, W., Brit. med. J., 1954, ii, 948.Google Scholar
Idem , Clinical Psychiatry, 1954. Cassell.Google Scholar
Partridge, M., J. Ment. Sci., 1949, 95, 795.Google Scholar
Idem , Postgrad. M. J., 1954, 176.Google Scholar
Rees, W. L., J. Ment. Sci., 1950, 96, 426.Google Scholar
Rennie, T. A. C., Amer. J. Psychiat., 1942, 98, 801.Google Scholar
Roberts, J. M., 1959. In press.Google Scholar
Shagass, C., Naiman, J., and Mihalik, J., Arch. Neurol. and Psychiat., 1956, 75, 461.Google Scholar
Sheldon, W. H., Stevens, S. S., and Tucker, W. B., The Varieties of Human Physique, 1940. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Strecker, E. A., Appel, K. E., et al., A. Res. Nerv. and Ment. Dis., 1931, 11, 471.Google Scholar
Tait, A. C., Harper, J., and McClatchey, W. T., J. Ment. Sci., 1957, 103, 132.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.