Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is an important treatment for catatonia. We aimed to study the response rate of catatonia treated with ECT and its clinical correlates in a large sample of inpatients. The ECT parameters of all patients (n = 63) admitted with catatonia between the months of January and December 2007 were examined. The number of ECTs administered, seizure threshold, failure to achieve adequate seizures and clinical signs pertaining to catatonia were analyzed. Response was considered as complete resolution of catatonic symptoms with Bush Francis Catatonia Rating Scale (BFCRS) score becoming zero. ECT was mostly started after failed lorazepam treatment except in 6 patients where ECT was the first choice. Patients who responded in 4 ECT sessions were considered fast responders (mean session number for response is 4 sessions) and response with 5 or more ECTs was considered slow response. Fast responders had significantly lower duration of catatonia (19.67 ± 21.66 days, P = 0.02) and higher BFCRS score at presentation (17.25 ± 6.21, P = 0.03). Presence of waxy flexibility and gegenhalten (22.60% vs. 0%, P = 0.01) predicted faster response, whereas presence of echophenomena (3.2% vs. 24.0%) predicted slow response. The response rate to catatonia appears to be associated with the severity and duration of catatonia, and the presence of certain catatonic signs.

No abstract

No abstract

Introduction:This is an exploratory study, which aimed to analyze urodynamic findings in patients who are on atypical antipsychotics and present with urinary incontinence (UI) in order to understand the mechanisms of antipsychotic-emergent UI.Patients and Methods:Eight patients (34 ± 7.6 years; five males and three females) diagnosed with schizophrenia or other psychotic disorders, who were on risperidone, olanzapine, or clozapine monotherapy and having UI were recruited. Urodynamic study was performed in all patients.Results:Six out of eight (75%) patients had abnormal urodynamic findings. Three of them had detrusor overactivity (DO) without detrusor-sphincter dyssynergia (DSD); two had DO with DSD; and one had hypoactive detrusor with nonrelaxing sphincter during void phase. The common urinary symptoms were urgency, enuresis, and straining to void urine. Significant postvoid residual urine was found in two patients.Conclusion:The evidence of bladder dysfunction in atypical antipsychotic-emergent UI is similar to that present in patients with neurological disorders. Urinary complaints in patients on antipsychotics thus need to be evaluated and managed systematically using the protocol followed for neurological conditions.

Objective: Catatonia can be life-threatening unless timely identified and treated. Lorazepam’s ubiquitous response has led to its universal acceptance as being the first-line management of catatonia and alludes to catatonia’s neurobiological underpinnings. Lorazepam challenge test (LCT) is widely used to either confirm a catatonia diagnosis or determine lorazepam sensitivity. It has a proposed schedule for administering lorazepam. However, efficacy of recommended LCT doses lack systematic evidence, resulting in variable LCT doses used in clinical and research settings contributing to findings that are challenging to generalize or assist with developing standardized lorazepam treatment protocols for catatonia. Given the same, this study aimed to objectively compare the response between two groups receiving different LCT doses and factors influencing the same. Methods: The 6-month study in a psychiatric emergency setting at a tertiary neuropsychiatric center in India evaluated 57 catatonia patients, before and after administration of single 2 mg ( n = 37; LCT-2) or 4 mg ( n = 20; LCT-4) lorazepam dose, applying Bush Francis Catatonia Rating Scale (BFCRS), Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI 5.0) and obtaining sociodemographic, clinical data. Results: No between-group differences (LCT-2 vs LCT-4) for sociodemographic, clinical profiles or BFCRS severity score changes to lorazepam on Mann–Whitney U test were noted. Applying Wilcoxon signed rank test comparing individual sign severity demonstrated response variability, with significant response noted to both doses (stupor, mutism, staring, posturing, withdrawal, ambitendency, automatic obedience) and others selectively to 2 mg (echolalia, rigidity, negativism, mitgehen). Notably, sign resolution (present/absent) only to 2 mg was significant for stupor, mutism, staring, posturing, echolalia, rigidity, negativism and mitgehen. Conclusion: This study suggests 2 mg lorazepam may be an optimal LCT dose, given significant response to most catatonic signs thereby ensuring accurate detection and preventing misinterpretation of response. It offers future studies direction for standardizing lorazepam dosing schedules for catatonia management and exploring neurobiological underpinnings for individual catatonic signs that may be potentially different, given these findings.