Background: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a recognized intervention for severe mental conditions, such as major depression, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder. The selection of anesthetic drug markedly affects seizure quality, hemodynamic response, and recovery profile. Propofol and Thiopentone are frequently utilized induction drugs, each possessing unique pharmacological characteristics. Propofol provides swift recovery and cardiovascular stability, but Thiopentone is associated with prolonged seizure duration. Evaluating their efficacy and safety is crucial for optimizing anesthesia management during ECT and enhancing patient outcomes. Aim: This study compares the efficacy and safety of Propofol and Thiopentone as induction agents for ECT. Materials and Method: A prospective study was conducted on 48 patients undergoing ECT, divided into two equal groups of 24 each. Group P received Propofol (1–2 mg/kg), while Group T received Thiopentone (3–5 mg/kg) as induction agents. Hemodynamic parameters (heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure), seizure duration, induction time, recovery time, and adverse events were recorded and analyzed. Results: Propofol was associated with significantly faster induction and recovery time compared to Thiopentone (p < 0.05). However, seizure duration was shorter in the Propofol group, though still within therapeutically acceptable limits. Thiopentone maintained longer seizure activity but was associated with a slower recovery and higher incidence of post-procedural confusion. Hemodynamic responses were more stable in the Propofol group. Conclusion: Both Propofol and Thiopentone are effective induction agents for ECT. Propofol offers advantages in terms of hemodynamic stability, rapid onset, and quicker recovery, making it a preferable choice for outpatient settings. Thiopentone, while producing longer seizures, may be better suited in cases where prolonged seizure duration is desirable.

Anaesthetic agents, Electroconvulsive therapy, Propofol, Seizure, Thiopentone