A Pilot Study of Switching Electroconvulsive Therapy for Patients With Treatment Resistant Schizophrenia or Mood Disorder.

OBJECTIVES: Switching of ECT electrode modality is commonly done in clinical practice but outcomes are unclear. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between ECT modality switchers and nonswitchers in a large tertiary psychiatric institution over 1 year. METHODS: Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) were used to assess symptoms and cognition. General linear regression was utilized to compare the change of BPRS or MADRS and MoCA score among switchers vs nonswitchers. RESULTS: 21.5% of 209 patients switched ECT. Baseline BPRS scores were lower among nonswitchers. Response rate in schizophrenia, depression and mania were higher for nonswitchers (69.6%, 81.35% and 84.8% respectively / 9.2 (SD 3.3) sessions) compared to switchers (53.8%, 0% and 66.7% respectively / 10.6 (SD 4.5) sessions). Most common ECT switches were Bifrontal (BF) to Bitemporal (BT) (schizophrenia), UB RUL (ultrabrief right unilateral) to BT (depression), and UB RUL to BT / BF (mania). There was no significant difference in the change of BPRS and MoCA scores between nonswitchers and switchers. However, there was significantly more improvement of MADRS scores among nonswitchers [adjusted mean ± SE: (-26.4 ± 2.8)] compared with switchers (-10.6) ±6.6). CONCLUSIONS: ECT switching was commonly done and may result in better or worse outcomes than not switching depending on diagnosis. Controlled trials are required to address this urgent clinical issue.

Perceived Neighborhood Environment and Its Association with Health Screening and Exercise Participation amongst Low-Income Public Rental Flat Residents in Singapore.

Background: In Singapore, an Asian city-state, more than 80% live in public housing. While the majority (90%) own their homes, a needy minority lives in rental flats. Public rental flats are built in the same location as owner-occupied blocks. We evaluated factors associated with perceptions of the neighborhood environment and its association with exercise and health screening participation. Methods: Logistic regression was used to identify associations between perceptions of the neighborhood environment (overall perceived neighborhood disadvantage, safety, and convenience) and sociodemographic factors, as well as exercise and screening participation, amongst residents aged ≥60 years in two Singaporean public housing precincts in 2016. Results: Our response rate was 62.1% (528/800). Staying in a rental flat independently was associated with increased neighborhood disadvantage (adjusted odds ratio, aOR = 1.58, 95%CI = 1.06⁻2.35). Staying in a stand-alone block (as opposed to staying in a mixed block comprised of both rental and owner-occupied units) was associated with perceptions of a poorer physical environment (aOR = 1.81, 95%CI = 1.22⁻2.68) and lower perceived proximity to recreational areas (aOR = 1.14, 95%CI = 1.04⁻1.25). Perceptions of neighborhood disadvantage were independently associated with reduced exercise participation (aOR = 0.67, 95%CI = 0.45⁻0.98) and reduced participation in diabetes screening (aOR = 0.63, 95%CI = 0.41⁻0.95). Conclusion: Despite sharing the same built environment, differences in the perception of the neighborhood environment between low-socioeconomic status (SES) and high-SES communities persist. Perceived neighborhood disadvantage is associated with lower participation in regular exercise and diabetes screening.