A comparison of right unilateral and sequential bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for major depression: a naturalistic clinical Australian study

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorGalletly, C.A.
dc.contributor.authorCarnell, B.L.
dc.contributor.authorClarke, P.
dc.contributor.authorGill, S.
dc.date.issued2017
dc.description.abstractBackground: A great deal of research has established the efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in the treatment of depression. However, questions remain about the optimal method to deliver treatment. One area requiring consideration is the difference in efficacy between bilateral and unilateral treatment protocols. Objective: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of sequential bilateral rTMS and right unilateral rTMS. Methods: A total of 135 patients participated in the study, receiving either bilateral rTMS (N = 57) or right unilateral rTMS (N = 78). Treatment response was assessed using the Hamilton depression rating scale. Results: Sequential bilateral rTMS had a higher response rate than right unilateral (43.9% vs 30.8%), but this difference was not statistically significant. This was also the case for remission rates (33.3% vs 21.8%, respectively). Controlling for pretreatment severity of depression, the results did not indicate a significant difference between the protocols with regard to posttreatment Hamilton depression rating scale scores. Conclusions: The current study found no statistically significant differences in response and remission rates between sequential bilateral rTMS and right unilateral rTMS. Given the shorter treatment time and the greater safety and tolerability of right unilateral rTMS, this may be a better choice than bilateral treatment in clinical settings.
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityCherrie A. Galletly, Benjamin L. Carnell, Patrick Clarke, Shane Gill
dc.identifier.citationThe Journal of Electroconvulsive Therapy, 2017; 33(1):58-62
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/YCT.0000000000000359
dc.identifier.issn1095-0680
dc.identifier.issn1533-4112
dc.identifier.orcidGalletly, C.A. [0000-0001-6185-9677]
dc.identifier.orcidGill, S. [0000-0001-7180-1807]
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/114813
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherLippincott, Williams & Wilkins
dc.rights© 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
dc.source.urihttps://journals.lww.com/ectjournal/Abstract/2017/03000/A_Comparison_of_Right_Unilateral_and_Sequential.13.aspx
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectRecurrence
dc.subjectTreatment Outcome
dc.subjectDepressive Disorder, Major
dc.subjectPsychiatric Status Rating Scales
dc.subjectAdult
dc.subjectAged
dc.subjectMiddle Aged
dc.subjectPatient Dropouts
dc.subjectAustralia
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation
dc.subjectFunctional Laterality
dc.titleA comparison of right unilateral and sequential bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for major depression: a naturalistic clinical Australian study
dc.typeJournal article
pubs.publication-statusPublished

Files

Collections

Psychology publications