We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
REVIEW
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Information, consent and perceived coercion: patients' perspectives on electroconvulsive therapy.
British Journal of Psychiatry 2005 January
BACKGROUND: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a procedure that attracts special safeguards under common law for voluntary patients and under both current and proposed mental health legislation, for those receiving compulsory treatment.
AIMS: To review patients' views on issues of information, consent and perceived coercion.
METHOD: Seventeen papers and reports were identified that dealt with patients' views on information and consent in relation to ECT; 134 'testimonies' or first-hand accounts were identified. The papers and reports were subjected to a descriptive systematic review. The testimony data were analysed qualitatively.
RESULTS: Approximately half the patients reported that they had received sufficient information about ECT and side-effects. Approximately a third did not feel they had freely consented to ECT even when they had signed a consent form. Clinician-led research evaluates these findings to mean that patients trust their doctors, whereas user-led work evaluates similar findings as showing inadequacies in informed consent.
CONCLUSION: Neither current nor proposed safeguards for patients are sufficient to ensure informed consent with respect to ECT, at least in England and Wales.
AIMS: To review patients' views on issues of information, consent and perceived coercion.
METHOD: Seventeen papers and reports were identified that dealt with patients' views on information and consent in relation to ECT; 134 'testimonies' or first-hand accounts were identified. The papers and reports were subjected to a descriptive systematic review. The testimony data were analysed qualitatively.
RESULTS: Approximately half the patients reported that they had received sufficient information about ECT and side-effects. Approximately a third did not feel they had freely consented to ECT even when they had signed a consent form. Clinician-led research evaluates these findings to mean that patients trust their doctors, whereas user-led work evaluates similar findings as showing inadequacies in informed consent.
CONCLUSION: Neither current nor proposed safeguards for patients are sufficient to ensure informed consent with respect to ECT, at least in England and Wales.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app