What does this research mean for the field?

Electroconvulsive therapy is highly effective for treating catatonia in both autistic and non-autistic patients, though autistic patients, particularly those with intellectual disability, require longer maintenance treatment courses. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.INCREMENTAL. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

What question did this study set out to answer?

To compare longitudinal electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) utilization, safety, and clinical outcomes between autistic and non-autistic patients treated for catatonia.

September 10, 2026Autism ResearchOpen Access

Electroconvulsive Therapy for Catatonia in Autistic and Non‐Autistic Patients: An Observational Study on Course, Efficacy, Aggression, and Self‐Injury Outcomes

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

JSJoshua R. Smith MBMaria Bonnée SMSarah Marler

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Observational cohort study demonstrates high efficacy and longer maintenance electroconvulsive therapy in autistic patients with catatonia, highlighting the need for sustained treatment access.

Key Points

To compare longitudinal electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) utilization, safety, and clinical outcomes between autistic and non-autistic patients treated for catatonia.
Conducted a single-center observational cohort study of 110 patients (43 autistic and 67 non-autistic) receiving acute and maintenance ECT from May 2022 through April 2026.
Evaluated outcomes using the Bush-Francis Catatonia Rating Scale (BFCRS), Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S), and Kanner scale scores via covariate-adjusted, censoring-aware models stratified by intellectual disability status.
Autistic patients received more ECT sessions (median, 35 vs. 14) over longer courses (median, 342 vs. 97 days), driven by extended retention in maintenance ECT among autistic patients with intellectual disability (Cox hazard ratio, 0.21).
Substantial clinical improvement occurred across groups: CGI-I response was 100.0% in autistic versus 89.1% in non-autistic patients, BFCRS reduction of ≥50% occurred in 76.9% versus 75.4%, and CGI-S improvement of ≥1 point was 85.0% versus 70.8%.
Self-injury prevalence decreased from 42.9% to 17.1% among autistic patients, combativeness improved across both cohorts, and documented adverse events were uncommon.

Cite This Study

Smith et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6aa27b0c58559d80afc741c7 https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.70362

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

September 10, 2026Autism ResearchOpen Access

Electroconvulsive Therapy for Catatonia in Autistic and Non‐Autistic Patients: An Observational Study on Course, Efficacy, Aggression, and Self‐Injury Outcomes

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

JSJoshua R. Smith MBMaria Bonnée SMSarah Marler

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Observational cohort study demonstrates high efficacy and longer maintenance electroconvulsive therapy in autistic patients with catatonia, highlighting the need for sustained treatment access.

Key Points

To compare longitudinal electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) utilization, safety, and clinical outcomes between autistic and non-autistic patients treated for catatonia.
Conducted a single-center observational cohort study of 110 patients (43 autistic and 67 non-autistic) receiving acute and maintenance ECT from May 2022 through April 2026.
Evaluated outcomes using the Bush-Francis Catatonia Rating Scale (BFCRS), Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S), and Kanner scale scores via covariate-adjusted, censoring-aware models stratified by intellectual disability status.
Autistic patients received more ECT sessions (median, 35 vs. 14) over longer courses (median, 342 vs. 97 days), driven by extended retention in maintenance ECT among autistic patients with intellectual disability (Cox hazard ratio, 0.21).
Substantial clinical improvement occurred across groups: CGI-I response was 100.0% in autistic versus 89.1% in non-autistic patients, BFCRS reduction of ≥50% occurred in 76.9% versus 75.4%, and CGI-S improvement of ≥1 point was 85.0% versus 70.8%.
Self-injury prevalence decreased from 42.9% to 17.1% among autistic patients, combativeness improved across both cohorts, and documented adverse events were uncommon.

Cite This Study

Smith et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6aa27b0c58559d80afc741c7 https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.70362

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark