OBJECTIVES: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is an effective treatment for @entity1 with @entity308 but carries the risk of @entity2414 . Bilateral ECT with ultrabrief pulses, instead of brief pulses, seems to result in a significant @entity73 . This study explores whether @entity1 treated with ultrabrief-pulse bilateral ECT achieve a similar treatment effect compared with @entity1 treated with regular brief-pulse bilateral ECT. METHODS: This retrospective study included 65 @entity1 with @entity308 treated with bilateral ECT, in the period 2002 to 2008. The @entity1 were divided into 2 groups, depending on whether they received a pulse-width treatment of 0.5 (46 @entity1 ) or 0.25 millisecond (19 @entity1 ). @entity308 symptoms were assessed with the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for @entity308 (HAM-D) score. Treatment outcomes were mean decrease in HAM-D score and treatment response rates and remission rates. RESULTS: The mean decrease in HAM-D score in the 0.25- and 0.50-millisecond groups was 20.1 (SD, 8.9) and 19.3 (SD, 9.2), respectively (difference not significant); response rates were 73.6% and 75.6%, and final remission rates were 42.1% and 45.6%, respectively. Thus, the decreases in HAM-D score and the response and remission rates were very similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this study population, the use of ultrabrief-pulse (0.25 millisecond) bilateral ECT resulted in equivalent treatment outcome and efficacy compared with bilateral ECT with a brief pulse (0.50 millisecond).

The efficacy of ultrabrief-pulse (0.25 millisecond) versus brief-pulse (0.50 millisecond) bilateral electroconvulsive therapy in XXXX .

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['patients'] @entity73 :: ('MESH:D003072', 'Disease') :: ['decrease in memory impairment'] @entity2414 :: ('MESH:D008569', 'Disease') :: ['memory impairment'] @entity308 :: ('MESH:D003866', 'Disease') :: ['Depressive', 'Depression', 'major depression']
@entity308 :: (MESH:D003866,Disease) :: ['major depression']
