Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T22:11:35.267Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Controlled Trial of Straight and Modified Electroplexy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2018

C. P. Seager
C. P. Seager*
Affiliation:
Barrow Hospital
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In a previous paper (Seager, 1958) I described a retrospective examination of the records of patients who had been suffering from depressive illness and who had received electroplexy, with or without an anaesthetic or relaxant drug. The results of that survey suggested that patients who received unmodified E.C.T. were in hospital for a shorter period, received fewer treatments and were more likely to remain well than those treated with modified E.C.T. Recognizing that the method of retrospective evaluation could give rise to many errors which would affect the results, I have now carried out a controlled trial of these treatments. The aim of the trial was to ascertain any difference between the results of modified and unmodified electroplexy, and if so, to find out which factor or factors were responsible for the difference.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Mental Science , Volume 105 , Issue 441 , October 1959 , pp. 1022 - 1028
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1959 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barker, J. C., “Electroplexy (E.C.T.) Techniques in Current Use”, J. Ment. Sci., 1958, 104, 1069–1078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Havens, L. L., “A Comparative Study of Modified and Unmodified Electric Shock Treatment”, Dis. Nerv. Syst., 1958, 19, 1–6.Google Scholar
Seager, C. P., “A Comparison Between the Results of Unmodified and Modified Electroplexy (E.C.T.)”, J. Ment. Sci., 1958, 104, 206–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.