Commentary: The Dilemma of Unmodified Electroconvulsive Therapy
Chittaranjan Andrade, MD; Nilesh Shah, DPM, MD, DNB;
and Prathap Tharyan, MD, MRCPsych
J Clin Psychiatry 2003;64(10):1147-1152
© Copyright 2015 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.
To view this item, select one of the options below.
-
-
Purchase This PDF for $40.00
If you are not a paid subscriber, you may purchase the PDF.
(You'll need the free Adobe Acrobat Reader.)
-
Subscribe
Receive immediate full-text access to JCP. You can subscribe to JCP online-only ($86) or print + online ($156 individual).
With your subscription, receive a free PDF collection of the NCDEU Festschrift articles. Hurry! This offer ends December 31, 2011.
-
-
Activate
If you are a paid subscriber to JCP and do not yet have a username and password, activate your subscription now.
-
Sign in
As a paid subscriber who has activated your subscription, you have access to the HTML and PDF versions of this item.
-
Click here to login.
-
Did you forget your password?
Still can't log in? Contact the Circulation Department at 1-800-489-1001 x4 or send email
Because this piece does not
have an abstract, we have provided for your benefit the first 3 sentences
of the full text.
Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) was introduced in
1938, in an era in which antidepressant and antipsychotic
drugs were unknown.
1,2 Today, over 6 decades later, despite the availability of a large number of psychopharmacologic agents for the treatment of depression and psychosis, ECT remains an important method of treatment in
psychiatry. This is because ECT can be life-saving in catatonic, suicidal, or otherwise severely disturbed patients,
2
because it is of exceptional benefit to patients with psychotic depression,
3
and because it can be therapeutic
4–6 as
well as prophylactic
7
in patients who do not respond to
antidepressant or antipsychotic drugs.