How Accurate are ECT Patient Information Leaflets Provided by Mental Health Services in England and the Royal College of Psychiatrists? An Independent Audit

2021 ◽  
pp. EHPP-D-21-00003
Author(s):  
Christopher Harrop ◽  
John Read ◽  
Jim Geekie ◽  
Julia Renton

BackgroundThe aims of this paper were to assess the accuracy of patient information leaflets about electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in England, and assess compliance with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommendations, and the principle of informed consent.MethodsFreedom of Information Act requests were sent to 51 National Health Service Trusts for a copy of their information leaflet. These, and three Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) leaflets, were scored on a 40-item accuracy measure.ResultsThirty-six Trusts (71%) provided leaflets. The number of accurate statements, from a possible 29, ranged from four to 20, with a mean of 12.8. The most commonly omitted accurate statements included: that previous treatments, including psychological therapy, should be tried first (mentioned by 12 Trusts); cardiovascular side effects (6); lack of long-term benefits (6); patients’ right to take 24 hours to consider giving consent (1); memory loss higher in women and older people (0). The number of inaccurate statements averaged 5.8, out of 11, and ranged from two to nine. The most common inaccurate statements included: ECT corrects biological deficits (28); misleading claims of very low mortality risk (28); minimization of memory loss (23); claims that ECT saves lives (22); claims of very high improvement rates (19). The current (2020) RCPsych leaflet contained seven inaccurate statements and scored worse than two previous RCPsych leaflets.ConclusionsInformation leaflets about ECT comply neither with NICE recommendations nor the principle of informed consent. Patients are being misled about the risks they are taking and the limited nature of ECT’s benefits.

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Inger Askehave ◽  
Karen Korning Zethsen

Since becoming mandatory in the EU in 1992, the patient information leaflet (PIL) has been the subject of an on-going discussion regarding its ability to provide easily understandable information. This study examines whether the lay-friendliness of Danish PILs has improved from 2000 to 2012 according to the Danish consumers. A reproduction of a questionnaire study from 2000 was carried out. The responses of the 2012 survey were compared to those of the 2000 survey and the analysis showed that Danes are less inclined to read the PIL in 2012 compared to 2000 and that the general interest in PILs has decreased. The number of respondents who deem the PIL easy to read has gone down. According to Danish consumers, the lay-friendliness of PILs has not improved from 2000 to 2012 and a very likely explanation could be that the PIL as a genre has become far too regulated and complex to live up to its original intentions. On the basis of the empirical results the article furthermore offers suggestions for practice changes.


BMJ Open ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. e007612-e007612 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. G. P. M. de Bont ◽  
M. Alink ◽  
F. C. J. Falkenberg ◽  
G.-J. Dinant ◽  
J. W. L. Cals

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document