Last Resort Interventions?: A Qualitative Study of Psychiatrists' Experience with and Views on Psychiatric Electroceutical Interventions

Explaining key stakeholders' preferences for potential policies governing psychiatric electroceutical intervention use

In recent years, legislators in many states have proposed laws governing the use of psychiatric electroceutical interventions (PEIs), which use electrical or magnetic stimulation to treat mental disorders. To examine how the PEI views of relevant stakeholder groups (e.g., psychiatrists, patients, caregivers, and general public) relate to preferences for proposed policies governing PEI use, we analyze data from a survey on using one of four PEIs to treat major depressive disorder administered to national samples of the stakeholder groups above. We find that the three non-clinician groups' similar PEI policy preferences differ significantly from those of psychiatrists-with the greatest divide on policies governing the use of electroconvulsive therapy. This divide between psychiatrists' and non-clinicians' PEI policy preferences was greater with access-reducing than with access-expanding policies. We advise policymakers to consider such variation in the preferred availability of PEIs across modalities and stakeholder groups when crafting legislation on these interventions.

Public Perceptions of Treating Opioid Use Disorder With Deep Brain Stimulation: Comment Analysis Study

BACKGROUND

The number of opioid-related deaths in the United States has more than tripled over the past 7 years, with a steep increase beginning at the same time as the COVID-19 pandemic. There is an urgent need for novel treatment options that can help alleviate the individual and social effects of refractory opioid use disorder (OUD). Deep brain stimulation (DBS), an intervention that involves implanting electrodes in the brain to deliver electrical impulses, is one potential treatment. Currently in clinical trials for many psychiatric conditions, including OUD, DBS's use for psychiatric indications is not without controversy. Several studies have examined ethical issues raised by using DBS to counter treatment-resistant depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and eating disorders. In contrast, there has been limited literature regarding the use of DBS for OUD.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to gain empirical neuroethical insights into public perceptions regarding the use of DBS for OUD, specifically via the analysis of web-based comments on news media stories about the topic.

METHODS

Qualitative thematic content analysis was performed on 2 Washington Post newspaper stories that described a case of DBS being used to treat OUD. A total of 292 comments were included in the analysis, 146 comments from each story, to identify predominant themes raised by commenters.

RESULTS

Predominant themes raised by commenters across the 2 samples included the hopes and expectations with treatment outcomes, whether addiction is a mental health disorder, and issues related to resource allocation. Controversial comments regarding DBS as a treatment method for OUD seemingly decreased when comparing the first printed newspaper story to the second. In comparison, the number of comments relating to therapeutic need increased over time.

CONCLUSIONS

The general public's perspectives on DBS as a treatment method for OUD elucidated themes via this qualitative thematic content analysis that include overarching sociopolitical issues, positions on the use of technology, and technological and scientific issues. A better understanding of the public perceptions around the use of DBS for OUD can help address misinformation and misperceptions about the use of DBS for OUD, and identify similarities and differences regarding ethical concerns when DBS is used specifically for OUD compared to other psychiatric disorders.

Opinion, Use and Knowledge About Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Spain: A National Survey of Mental Health Professionals

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a non-invasive method of neuromodulation with heterogeneous usage between countries, which may be potentially influenced by healthcare professionals' opinions. This study aimed to assess the knowledge, acceptability, and attitudes of mental health professionals in Spain towards TMS. A cross-sectional multicentric study was conducted using an online survey, with 219 participants including psychiatrists, psychologists, and residents. Nearly 100% of participants correctly answered theoretical aspects related to the rationale and indications of TMS. Although only 55% considered TMS effective, 80% would refer patients if TMS were available at their workplace, and 74% would undergo TMS if experiencing depression. 85% believed neuromodulation training should be increased in residency, and 73% demanded TMS inclusion in public hospitals. Teaching staff and psychologists defined TMS as a last resort (p = 0.03 and 0.045). Both disagreed on its ease of use (p < 0.001) and patient referral (p = 0.01), considering an impact on the therapeutic bond (p = 0.029). Previous TMS training, clinical experience, or availability of TMS at the workplace, were associated with better knowledge, a higher perception of efficacy and utility in treating resistant patients (all p < 0.05). In conclusion, surveyed mental health professionals in Spain demonstrated good knowledge of the technique and positive opinions regarding its utility. Findings emphasized limited clinical experience of the sample, a call for training programs, and the demand for the inclusion of TMS in the portfolio of Spanish public hospitals.

Adolescent OCD Patient and Caregiver Perspectives on Identity, Authenticity, and Normalcy in Potential Deep Brain Stimulation Treatment

The ongoing debate within neuroethics concerning the degree to which neuromodulation such as deep brain stimulation (DBS) changes the personality, identity, and agency (PIA) of patients has paid relatively little attention to the perspectives of prospective patients. Even less attention has been given to pediatric populations. To understand patients' views about identity changes due to DBS in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), the authors conducted and analyzed semistructured interviews with adolescent patients with OCD and their parents/caregivers. Patients were asked about projected impacts to PIA generally due to DBS. All patient respondents and half of caregivers reported that DBS would impact patient self-identity in significant ways. For example, many patients expressed how DBS could positively impact identity by allowing them to explore their identities free from OCD. Others voiced concerns that DBS-related resolution of OCD might negatively impact patient agency and authenticity. Half of patients expressed that DBS may positively facilitate social access through relieving symptoms, while half indicated that DBS could increase social stigma. These views give insights into how to approach decision-making and informed consent if DBS for OCD becomes available for adolescents. They also offer insights into adolescent experiences of disability identity and "normalcy" in the context of OCD.

Looking through the lens of stigma: Understanding and anticipating concerns about the responsible development and use of psychiatric electroceutical interventions (PEIs)

Psychiatric electroceutical interventions (PEIs) show promise for treating depression, but few studies have examined stakeholders' views on them. Using interview data and survey data that analyzed the views of psychiatrists, patients, caregivers, and the general public, a conceptual map was created to represent stakeholders' views on four PEIs: electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), deep brain stimulation (DBS), and adaptive brain implants (ABIs). Stigma emerged as a key theme connecting diverse views, revealing that it is a significant factor in the acceptance and usage of PEIs. Stigma not only discourages seeking mental health services for depression but also inhibits the acceptance of PEIs. Addressing the pervasive and complex effects of stigma highlights the need to change societal attitudes toward mental illnesses and their treatments and to provide support to patients who may benefit from these interventions. The map also demonstrates the value of conceptual mapping for anticipating and mitigating ethical considerations in the development and use of PEIs.

Stakeholders' Ethical Concerns Regarding Psychiatric Electroceutical Interventions: Results from a US Nationwide Survey

BACKGROUND

Psychiatric electroceutical interventions (PEIs) use electrical or magnetic stimulation to treat mental disorders and may raise different ethical concerns than other therapies such as medications or talk therapy. Yet little is known about stakeholders' perceptions of, and ethical concerns related to, these interventions. We aimed to better understand the ethical concerns of a variety of stakeholder groups (patients with depression, caregivers of patients, members of the public, and psychiatrists) regarding four PEIs: electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), deep brain stimulation (DBS), and adaptive brain implants (ABI).

METHODS

We conducted a national survey of these four stakeholder groups, using an embedded video vignette experiment depicting a patient with treatment-resistant depression and her psychiatrist discussing the possibility of treatment with one of the four PEIs.

RESULTS

Participants' ethical concerns varied by stakeholder group, by PEI, and by the interaction of the two. The three non-clinician groups tended to have similar ethical concerns, but to differ from psychiatrists. Similar concerns were raised with regard to the two implantable technologies, DBS and ABI. Overall, there was relatively little concern about the involuntary use of PEIs, though some expressed concern about the adequacy of information provided during the consent process. There was also significant concern that patients may not receive helpful therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first national survey that includes multiple stakeholder groups and multiple PEI modalities. A better understanding of the ethical concerns of stakeholders can help to shape clinical practice and health care policy regarding PEIs.

A qualitative study of key stakeholders' perceived risks and benefits of psychiatric electroceutical interventions

Amid a renewed interest in alternatives to psychotherapy and medication to treat depression, there is limited data as to how different stakeholders perceive of the risks and benefits of psychiatric electroceutical interventions (PEIs), including electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and deep brain stimulation (DBS). To address this gap, we conducted 48 semi-structured interviews, including 16 psychiatrists, 16 persons diagnosed with depression, and 16 members of the general public. To provide a basis of comparison, we asked participants to also compare each modality to front-line therapies for depression and to neurosurgical procedures used for non-psychiatric conditions. Across all stakeholder groups, perceived memory loss was the most frequently mentioned potential risk with ECT. The most discussed benefits across all stakeholder groups were efficacy and quick response. Psychiatrists most often referenced effectiveness when discussing ECT, while patients and the public did so when discussing DBS. Taken as a whole, these data highlight stakeholders' contrasting perspectives on the risks and benefits of electroceuticals.