|
|
|||||||||||
Argyll and Bute Hospital, Lochgilphead, Argyll PA31 8LD
West Lothian Healthcare NHS Trust, Bangour Village Hospital, West Lothian EH52 6LN
Tipperlin House, Royal Edinburgh Hospital, Edinburgh EH10 5HF
The audit was funded by a grant from the Clinical Resource and Audit Group of the Scottish Executive Health Department.
|
|
Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We aimed to compare the practice of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in Scotland with the recommendations of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, to determine the characteristics of patients who receive ECT, to assess the outcome of ECT given in a routine clinical setting and to develop a system of quality assurance for ECT. Between February 1997 and March 2000, an audit of ECT measured the quality of treatment given at all clinics in Scotland. Audit tools were designed and standards set for the process, and outcome of treatment and interventions were identified to address any variance prior to each audit cycle. An electronic data collection system was developed and a website produced for the purpose of continued audit and information sharing.
RESULTS
The annual rate of ECT in Scotland was 142 individual treatments per 100 000 of the total population. Electroconvulsive therapy was given mainly to White adult patients with a depressive illness who had consented to treatment. Clinical improvement, as measured by at least a 50% reduction in the MontgomeryÅsberg Rating Scale for Depression (MADRS) score, was evident in 71.2% of patients with a depressive episode.
CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS
The audit of ECT is achievable at a national level, ECT is effective in a routine clinical setting and the standards at ECT in Scotland are higher than the UK average.
|
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
Method |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Training of ECT staff in the collection of demographic and outcome data was standardised by use of a teaching video. Two members of the management team visited all clinics at least twice to assess premises and equipment, treatment protocols and ECT training and supervision.
The process standards were drawn from the Royal College of Psychiatrists' ECT Handbook (Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1995) and were formulated as a checklist. The standard for clinical improvement was set as at least a 50% reduction in the MontgomeryÅsberg Rating Scale for Depression (MADRS; Montgomery & Åsberg, 1979) in 70% of patients or a definite improvement in the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI) (Guy, 1976), if more relevant. The Clinical Resource Audit Group (CRAG) Good Practice Statement on Electroconvulsive Therapy was published in February 1997 (Clinical Resource Audit Group, 1997) and acted as a timely intervention in promoting standards. A computer-based package for audit and quality assurance was developed and piloted by clinicians in 2000.
|
|
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Clinicians were asked to identify, for each patient, all relevant indications for treatment; these are given in Table 2. The recording of resistance to medication was at the discretion of each clinical team and so strict research criteria might not have been applied.
|
Is the ECT process up to standard?
Facilities and equipment
A total of 32 of the 35 services delivered ECT in a designated ECT suite.
Two had sole use of a theatre side-room. In the private sector, ECT was given
in the patient's own hospital room. In 1997, one unit still gave ECT in a ward
side-room, but by 1998 this service was closed.
All centres were using an acceptable ECT machine by the end of phase 1 of the audit. Anaesthetic equipment was generally of a high standard, the majority of units providing a level well above the College criteria for adequacy (with the exception of a capnograph, at that time considered non-essential by most anaesthetists interviewed).
Staffing
In all 34 National Health Service units trainee doctors were involved in
the delivery of ECT, although the rota might be shared by a senior colleague.
Three-quarters employed a rota system for attendance, with the majority of
trainees (69%) in rotas of six or less.
No clinic reported difficulties with routine anaesthetic cover, the majority enjoying input from a regular core of 1-3 senior anaesthetists (78%). At no location did junior anaesthetists work unsupervised. All patients for ECT were accompanied by a ward nurse or nurse familiar to them. The standard of nursing was high and 89% of ECT nurses were defined as either designated or special interest ward staff.
ECT practice
The ECT was always prescribed by a consultant psychiatrist. There was a
30-fold variation in the rate of use of ECT across the country, ranging
between 13 and 386 ECT treatments per 100 000 head of population. Written
information for patients was available at all locations. Bilateral ECT
remained the treatment of choice. By completion of the audit, all units had,
in line with College recommendations, developed a protocol for altering the
electrical stimulus according to response. Clinical information on response to
treatment was available for the ECT team from case notes at 89% of sites in
1997, rising to 97% by 1999.
Training and supervision
Ratings were made following interviews with the ECT consultant, the senior
house officer giving ECT at the time of the audit visit and in response to a
questionnaire sent to all senior house officers at ECT. The information
received was consistent. Induction training was rated as adequate for 93% of
senior house officers, but continuing supervision was adequate in only 55% of
clinics.
Local audit activity
A total of 80% of units had undertaken some kind of review or audit of
their own activities in the 3 years before the start of this audit. This had
led to an update in equipment or practice in half of these clinics.
The overall ratings made during phases 1 (1997) and 3 (1999) of the project are given in Table 3. These showed an improvement in premises and equipment to College standard, no real change in the already high level of induction training and some improvement in continued supervision. An explanation of the rating scales can be found in the full report (Freeman et al, 2000).
|
Is ECT effective?
Data on outcome were recorded on 78% of the audit forms returned. As
Table 4 shows, there was an
average clinical improvement with treatment, as measured by at least a 50%
reduction in MADRS score (the audit standard), in 71.2% of patients treated
for depressive illness. By phase three of the audit, a CGI was recorded for
all patients and Table 5 shows
ratings of definite improvement in over 72% of patients with
depressive disorder and over 60% for other (psychotic) illnesses. Of the 636
patients who fully recovered, 342 (54%) did so within 3 weeks of starting ECT.
There was no relation between outcome and ECT machine or technique, but the
numbers in some centres were too small to reach a statistically significant
conclusion.
|
|
Discontinuation of treatment
The reasons for failing to complete a course of treatment were also
studied. In total, 88 of the 1314 courses supplying information were
discontinued prematurely; Table
6 outlines the reasons for this. The audit did not set out to
study in detail the adverse effects of ECT or the risks associated with
treatment; however, a more detailed discussion of these is to be found in the
project report available on the SEAN website
(www.sean.org).
|
|
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The College has identified the need for consultantled teaching and supervision, and the audit was a useful tool with which to benchmark local training practices. Although the level of induction training was high and all trainees were supervised for their first ECT session, there were some definite problems with continued supervision. The wide range in prescription of ECT across the country is interesting; at its highest, the use of ECT is comparable with other British surveys in the last 10 years, so it could be that the lower levels of use represent under-prescribing in some areas. In any case, claims from some anti-ECT lobbies that ECT in Scotland is overused or given preferentially to minority groups can now be refuted on the basis of this evidence.
This was the first time that outcome data were collected on a national basis and the major conclusion reached was that the clear majority of patients, given ECT in a routine clinical setting, improve. Because this was an audit of real life clinical practice, all other treatments, including concomitant medication, were continued as usual and local clinicians decided when a course of ECT was complete.
|
|
Further work |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
|
|
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
DUFFET, R. & LELLIOT, P. (1998) Auditing
electroconvulsive therapy. The third cycle. British Journal of
Psychiatry, 172,
401-405.
FREEMAN, C., HENDRY, J. & FERGUSSON, G. (2000) National Audit of Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT) in Scotland. January 2000. www.sean.org
GUY, W. (1976) ECDEU Assessment Manual for Psychopharmacology. Revised DHEW Pub. (ADM). Rockville, MD: National Institute for Mental Health.
MONTGOMERY, S. A. & ÅSBERG, M. (1979) A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change. British Journal of Psychiatry, 111, 240-242.
ROYAL COLLEGE OF PSYCHIATRISTS (1995) The ECT Handbook. Council report CR39. London: Royal College of Psychiatrists
SCOTTISH ECT AUDIT NETWORK (SEAN). Website www.sean.org (to download full report/examples of audit tools used).
SCOTTISH HEALTH STATISTICS (1998) ISD Scotland (SMR04) C10. 2.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| British Journal of Psychiatry | Advances in Psychiatric Treatment | All RCPsych Journals |