PB CPD Online e-learning site
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Psychiatry Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Psychiatric Bulletin (2006) 30: 13-15. doi: 10.1192/pb.30.1.13
© 2006 The Royal College of Psychiatrists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Law-Min, R.
Right arrow Articles by Stephens, J. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Law-Min, R.
Right arrow Articles by Stephens, J. P.
Psychiatric Bulletin (2006) 30: 13-15
© 2006 The Royal College of Psychiatrists

Capacity, compliance and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT): the practice of ECT among consultant psychiatrists

Richard Law-Min, Specialist Registrar in Adult and Old Age Psychiatry

Dorset Healthcare NHS Trust, Hahnemann House, West Cliff, Bournemouth BH2 5JW, Dorset, e-mail: lawminr{at}ntlworld.com

John Patrick Stephens, Consultant Psychiatrist

Dorset Healthcare NHS Trust

Declaration of interest

None.

AIMS AND METHOD

The aim of this study was to seek the views of consultant psychiatrists on the legal framework they would use when considering treatment with electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). A questionnaire, consisting of three clinical vignettes, was sent to 70 consultants in the Wessex rotation (East Dorset/Hampshire region).

RESULTS

A total of 56 questionnaires were returned; a response rate of 80%. Most consultant psychiatrists agree when giving ECT to capacitated and non-consenting patients. However, there was a lack of consensus when dealing with seemingly incapacitated but compliant patients.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

More clarification in this area is needed. Trusts can assist clinicians by devising their own policies based on nationally agreed standards of best practice. The treatment of mentally incapacitated but compliant patients is an area of practice where uncertainty exists. If proceeding under common law in such cases, it is good practice to discuss with relatives/carers and obtain a second opinion from a consultant colleague. The most recent Bournewood judgement and the new Mental Health Bill will have further implications for clinical practice.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
History of PsychiatryHome page
C. Hilton
Changes between the 1959 and 1983 Mental Health Acts (England & Wales), with particular reference to consent to treatment for electroconvulsive therapy.
History of Psychiatry, June 1, 2007; 18(70 Pt 2): 217 - 229.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Psychiatry Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals
Copyright © 2006 The Royal College of Psychiatrists.