TY - JOUR
T1 - Jumping through the hoops
T2 - Barriers and other ethical concerns regarding the use of psychiatric electroceutical interventions
AU - Cabrera, Laura Y.
AU - Gilbert, Maryssa M.C.
AU - Achtyes, Eric D.
AU - McCright, Aaron M.
AU - Bluhm, Robyn
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Author(s)
PY - 2022/7
Y1 - 2022/7
N2 - Stakeholders’ perceptions of barriers to and other ethical concerns about using psychiatric electroceutical interventions (PEIs), interventions that use electrical or magnetic stimuli to treat psychiatric conditions like treatment-resistant depression (TRD), may influence the uptake of these interventions. This study examined such perceptions among psychiatrists, patients with depression, and members of the public. We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 16 members of each group to examine their views on practical barriers and ethical concerns. We used qualitative content analysis to identify relevant themes, and compared findings across stakeholder groups. Access limitations to the interventions, including cost and availability of the interventions, cut across all PEIs—including those that are still experimental, and were raised by all groups. Most participants across all groups raised concerns about informed consent, in terms of receiving adequate, appropriate, and understandable information. Our results suggest that these three stakeholder groups perceive similar structural and attitudinal barriers to, and have similar ethical concerns about, using PEIs for TRD. These results identify key issues that must be addressed for the full potential of PEIs to be realized. Future research with larger samples will help to better understand how to address these barriers to treatment for individuals with TRD.
AB - Stakeholders’ perceptions of barriers to and other ethical concerns about using psychiatric electroceutical interventions (PEIs), interventions that use electrical or magnetic stimuli to treat psychiatric conditions like treatment-resistant depression (TRD), may influence the uptake of these interventions. This study examined such perceptions among psychiatrists, patients with depression, and members of the public. We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 16 members of each group to examine their views on practical barriers and ethical concerns. We used qualitative content analysis to identify relevant themes, and compared findings across stakeholder groups. Access limitations to the interventions, including cost and availability of the interventions, cut across all PEIs—including those that are still experimental, and were raised by all groups. Most participants across all groups raised concerns about informed consent, in terms of receiving adequate, appropriate, and understandable information. Our results suggest that these three stakeholder groups perceive similar structural and attitudinal barriers to, and have similar ethical concerns about, using PEIs for TRD. These results identify key issues that must be addressed for the full potential of PEIs to be realized. Future research with larger samples will help to better understand how to address these barriers to treatment for individuals with TRD.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85130361605&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85130361605&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.psychres.2022.114612
DO - 10.1016/j.psychres.2022.114612
M3 - Article
C2 - 35584563
AN - SCOPUS:85130361605
SN - 0165-1781
VL - 313
JO - Psychiatry Research
JF - Psychiatry Research
M1 - 114612
ER -