No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 July 2023
Our aim was to analyse the trend in the use of new courses of ECT in Northamptonshire Healthcare Trust from 2007 to 2022 and to compare the use of ECT, Modified ECT (MECT), TMS, Ketamine and combined TMS + Ketamine in the Treatment Centre and The Centre for Neuromodulation in Northamptonshire Healthcare Trust from 2013 to 2022.
Data for new ECT courses were collected from the Treatment Centre in Northamptonshire Healthcare Trust from 2007 to 2022. These data were then compared with new courses for TMS, MECT, ketamine and combined TMS + Ketamine from various sites across the trust from 2013 to 2022. These data have been represented as two separate graphs the first showing trend of ECT and the second comparison of the trend of ECT, MECT, TMS, Ketamine & combined TMS + Ketamine.
The data show that there has been a significant decrease in the number of ECT and MECT procedures performed in recent years, with a decrease of over 50% to 70% in new courses of ECT & MECT among various units in the trust. Regarding the data for TMS treatment vs ECT there is a gradual decrease in ECT and increase in TMS over the years, of particular note is the recent period of 2019 to 2022 during which there were 10 times more referrals for TMS compared to ECT at Northamptonshire Healthcare Trust. During this period TMS accounted for 87% of the total new treatments, while ECT accounted for 9% and Ketamine 4%.
Our findings suggest that TMS is becoming an increasingly popular treatment option for depression and may eventually replace ECT and Modified ECT as the primary treatment in the Northamptonshire Healthcare Trust. This poster provides an overview of the current state of ECT, Modified ECT, TMS, and ketamine as treatments for depression, and highlights the need for further research to better understand the relative effectiveness and safety of these treatments, especially in treatment-resistant depression cases.
Abstracts were reviewed by the RCPsych Academic Faculty rather than by the standard BJPsych Open peer review process and should not be quoted as peer-reviewed by BJPsych Open in any subsequent publication.
eLetters
No eLetters have been published for this article.