Knowledge and Attitudes about Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Among Psychiatrists in China

Abstract

Background: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a noninvasive form of brain stimulation. It has been used in many mental health institutions to treat mental disorders worldwide. However, comprehensive knowledge about rTMS is not yet widespread among psychiatrists. The present study assessed psychiatrists’ knowledge and attitudes about rTMS in China and investigated related factors.Methods: A quantitative observational cross-sectional study was conducted using an online survey. The sample consisted of 522 psychiatrists. Multinomial logistic regression and multiple linear regression analyses were used to explore factors that contributed to psychiatrists’ knowledge about rTMS. We also ascertained psychiatrists’ attitudes about rTMS and provide recommendations for the more widespread use of rTMS.Results: The majority of respondents (86.4%) reported having access to rTMS at their institution. A total of 379 psychiatrists (72.6%) knew that rTMS was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for treatment-resistant depression. Univariate logistic regression indicated that psychiatrists who were older, had a senior professional title, worked more years, had an onsite clinical rTMS program in their hospital, and received formal training in theory and application (all p < 0.05) were more likely to know that rTMS was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of depression. The percentages of respondents who knew most or all indications, the mechanism of action, parameter settings, adverse reactions were 51.9%, 40.2%, 27.4%, and 41.4%. Linear regression showed that formal training in rTMS theory and practice were associated with higher knowledge scores (all p < 0.05). Most of the subjects had negative attitudes about using rTMS to treat mental disorders. When asked about their attitudes about continuing rTMS education, nearly all of the respondents indicated that they were willing to pursue continuing training in rTMS in the future. Conclusions: Many psychiatrists had an insufficient level of knowledge about rTMS and negative attitudes about rTMS. Psychiatrists who had formal rTMS training experience had higher levels of rTMS knowledge. rTMS training and relevant policy making should be strengthened.

A randomized pilot study of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Adolescents with Major Depressive Disorder.

“…There was limited literacy amongst potential referring mental health practitioners about the reported benefits rTMS in adolescents. This feedback for our team is consistent with reported literature that the limited education among mental health professionals regarding rTMS led to a negative attitude regarding use of rTMS and was itself a barrier to referral of patients with depression [54,55].…”

The Ethical Views of Turkish Researchers and the Ethics Committees on Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation

“…The opinions of researchers with experience in this eld are of great importance in reaching a consensus on the subject. Although there are some studies examining the attitudes of researchers about NIBS, there is a lack of studies that comprehensively address effectiveness, ethics, and legal regulations in the literature [3,12,13]. On the other hand, ethics committee processes are extremely important for conducting research on the subject.…”