Socioeconomic status of patients receiving electroconvulsive therapy

Daniel Mark Bennett, Isobel M. Cameron, James Currie, Jennifer Perrin, Ian C. Reid

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)
13 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This study describes the relationship between socioeconomic deprivation and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) prescription and outcomes. Two research questions are addressed in this study: (1) Does the rate of ECT prescription increase with deprivation? and (2) Does deprivation influence ECT outcomes? Electroconvulsive therapy outcomes, of consecutive patients from Aberdeen, were compared across socioeconomic groups determined by the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) quintiles. A primary care sample, invited to complete the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), was used for comparison. The proportion of patients in the most affluent quintile (32%) was greater than that in the least affluent (9%): this reflects the distribution of the local population, unlike the prevalence of depressive disorder, as demonstrated in our primary care group. Severity of depressive symptoms in patients receiving ECT was no different across the socioeconomic groups: before ECT (χ2 = 8.056; df = 4; P = 0.09), after ECT (χ2 = 6.035; df = 4; P = 0.197); nor was the total change in score (χ2 = 4.367; df = 4; P = 0.359). There were no differences among the SIMD quintiles for the number of ECT treatments administered (χ2 = 6.076; df = 4; P = 0.194) or the number of courses of ECT each patient had during contact with the service (χ2 = 6.505; df = 4; P = 0.164).

Socioeconomic deprivation has no effect on the rate of ECT prescription or treatment outcomes despite a higher proportion of patients with severe depressive symptoms in the least affluent groups in a local community sample.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)299-303
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of ECT
Volume29
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2013

Fingerprint

Electroconvulsive Therapy
Social Class
Prescriptions
Depression
Primary Health Care
Depressive Disorder
Anxiety
Demography

Keywords

  • ECT
  • severe depression
  • socioeconomic status

Cite this

Socioeconomic status of patients receiving electroconvulsive therapy. / Bennett, Daniel Mark; Cameron, Isobel M.; Currie, James; Perrin, Jennifer; Reid, Ian C.

In: Journal of ECT, Vol. 29, No. 4, 12.2013, p. 299-303.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Bennett, Daniel Mark ; Cameron, Isobel M. ; Currie, James ; Perrin, Jennifer ; Reid, Ian C. / Socioeconomic status of patients receiving electroconvulsive therapy. In: Journal of ECT. 2013 ; Vol. 29, No. 4. pp. 299-303.
@article{a7009ef630784177b86623c23855917d,
title = "Socioeconomic status of patients receiving electroconvulsive therapy",
abstract = "This study describes the relationship between socioeconomic deprivation and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) prescription and outcomes. Two research questions are addressed in this study: (1) Does the rate of ECT prescription increase with deprivation? and (2) Does deprivation influence ECT outcomes? Electroconvulsive therapy outcomes, of consecutive patients from Aberdeen, were compared across socioeconomic groups determined by the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) quintiles. A primary care sample, invited to complete the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), was used for comparison. The proportion of patients in the most affluent quintile (32{\%}) was greater than that in the least affluent (9{\%}): this reflects the distribution of the local population, unlike the prevalence of depressive disorder, as demonstrated in our primary care group. Severity of depressive symptoms in patients receiving ECT was no different across the socioeconomic groups: before ECT (χ2 = 8.056; df = 4; P = 0.09), after ECT (χ2 = 6.035; df = 4; P = 0.197); nor was the total change in score (χ2 = 4.367; df = 4; P = 0.359). There were no differences among the SIMD quintiles for the number of ECT treatments administered (χ2 = 6.076; df = 4; P = 0.194) or the number of courses of ECT each patient had during contact with the service (χ2 = 6.505; df = 4; P = 0.164).Socioeconomic deprivation has no effect on the rate of ECT prescription or treatment outcomes despite a higher proportion of patients with severe depressive symptoms in the least affluent groups in a local community sample.",
keywords = "ECT, severe depression , socioeconomic status",
author = "Bennett, {Daniel Mark} and Cameron, {Isobel M.} and James Currie and Jennifer Perrin and Reid, {Ian C.}",
year = "2013",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1097/YCT.0b013e31829a01fb",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "299--303",
journal = "Journal of ECT",
issn = "1095-0680",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Socioeconomic status of patients receiving electroconvulsive therapy

AU - Bennett, Daniel Mark

AU - Cameron, Isobel M.

AU - Currie, James

AU - Perrin, Jennifer

AU - Reid, Ian C.

PY - 2013/12

Y1 - 2013/12

N2 - This study describes the relationship between socioeconomic deprivation and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) prescription and outcomes. Two research questions are addressed in this study: (1) Does the rate of ECT prescription increase with deprivation? and (2) Does deprivation influence ECT outcomes? Electroconvulsive therapy outcomes, of consecutive patients from Aberdeen, were compared across socioeconomic groups determined by the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) quintiles. A primary care sample, invited to complete the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), was used for comparison. The proportion of patients in the most affluent quintile (32%) was greater than that in the least affluent (9%): this reflects the distribution of the local population, unlike the prevalence of depressive disorder, as demonstrated in our primary care group. Severity of depressive symptoms in patients receiving ECT was no different across the socioeconomic groups: before ECT (χ2 = 8.056; df = 4; P = 0.09), after ECT (χ2 = 6.035; df = 4; P = 0.197); nor was the total change in score (χ2 = 4.367; df = 4; P = 0.359). There were no differences among the SIMD quintiles for the number of ECT treatments administered (χ2 = 6.076; df = 4; P = 0.194) or the number of courses of ECT each patient had during contact with the service (χ2 = 6.505; df = 4; P = 0.164).Socioeconomic deprivation has no effect on the rate of ECT prescription or treatment outcomes despite a higher proportion of patients with severe depressive symptoms in the least affluent groups in a local community sample.

AB - This study describes the relationship between socioeconomic deprivation and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) prescription and outcomes. Two research questions are addressed in this study: (1) Does the rate of ECT prescription increase with deprivation? and (2) Does deprivation influence ECT outcomes? Electroconvulsive therapy outcomes, of consecutive patients from Aberdeen, were compared across socioeconomic groups determined by the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) quintiles. A primary care sample, invited to complete the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), was used for comparison. The proportion of patients in the most affluent quintile (32%) was greater than that in the least affluent (9%): this reflects the distribution of the local population, unlike the prevalence of depressive disorder, as demonstrated in our primary care group. Severity of depressive symptoms in patients receiving ECT was no different across the socioeconomic groups: before ECT (χ2 = 8.056; df = 4; P = 0.09), after ECT (χ2 = 6.035; df = 4; P = 0.197); nor was the total change in score (χ2 = 4.367; df = 4; P = 0.359). There were no differences among the SIMD quintiles for the number of ECT treatments administered (χ2 = 6.076; df = 4; P = 0.194) or the number of courses of ECT each patient had during contact with the service (χ2 = 6.505; df = 4; P = 0.164).Socioeconomic deprivation has no effect on the rate of ECT prescription or treatment outcomes despite a higher proportion of patients with severe depressive symptoms in the least affluent groups in a local community sample.

KW - ECT

KW - severe depression

KW - socioeconomic status

U2 - 10.1097/YCT.0b013e31829a01fb

DO - 10.1097/YCT.0b013e31829a01fb

M3 - Article

VL - 29

SP - 299

EP - 303

JO - Journal of ECT

JF - Journal of ECT

SN - 1095-0680

IS - 4

ER -