Relationships between seizure duration and seizure threshold and stimulus dosage at electroconvulsive therapy: Implications for electroconvulsive therapy practice

28Citations
Citations of this article
25Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Recent studies cast doubt on the usefulness of seizure duration as an index for stimulus dosage adjustment at electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). A retrospective analysis on the relationships between seizure duration and seizure threshold and stimulus dosage was performed for 54 patients who received a standardized ECT dose titration and treatment protocol. Subjects receiving stimulus dosage at seizure threshold had a highly variable motor seizure duration, ranging from 15 to 89s, and 7.4% of subjects had seizures longer than 60s. Regression analysis showed that initial seizure threshold and height were independent predictors of motor seizure duration during dose titration and accounted for 34% of its variance. Stimulus dosage was increased by 40-67% between the first and second ECT session; however, 60% of subjects had no lengthening of seizures and motor seizure duration was significantly shorter at the second treatment (mean ± SD: 35.7 ± 12.3 vs 31.0 ± 10.6 s; paired t = 2.9, d.f. = 34, P = 0.006). At the first and second ECT treatment, motor seizure duration was significantly related to stimulus dosage (r=-0.45 and r= -0.41, respectively). Given the negative correlation between seizure duration and stimulus intensity, a policy that recommends an increase of stimulus dosage and its reduction for patients with short and long seizures, respectively, does not necessarily result in 'optimal' seizure duration. A better dosing policy that places less emphasis on seizure duration is proposed.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Chung, K. F. (2002). Relationships between seizure duration and seizure threshold and stimulus dosage at electroconvulsive therapy: Implications for electroconvulsive therapy practice. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 56(5), 521–526. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1819.2002.01048.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free