OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose of the present study was to examine changes in utilization of pro re nata (PRN; 'as required') sedation over time within a child and adolescent psychiatric inpatient unit. The secondary purpose was to assess whether changes in PRN sedation were related to changing patient characteristics. METHODS: A retrospective chart review examined 257 medical charts from a child and youth mental health inpatient service over two time periods (wave I, n = 122; wave II, n = 135) and collected data on PRN sedation, patient characteristics and routine medications. RESULTS: Over time a significant reduction was observed in the proportion of patients prescribed PRN sedation from 70% to 54% (p < 0.01), and a reduction in the proportion of patients given PRN sedation from 46% to 26% (p < 0.01). The most commonly administered drug was chlorpromazine in wave I, and diazepam in wave II. Multivariate analysis indicated that reductions in PRN sedation occurred independently of changes in patient characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: High utilization rates of PRN sedation are not inevitable in a child and adolescent psychiatric inpatient unit and may be reduced over time. Changing utilization of PRN sedation occurred independently from changing patient characteristics. More treatment outcome studies are required to optimize use of PRN sedation in young people.
OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose of the present study was to examine changes in utilization of pro re nata (PRN; 'as required') sedation over time within a child and adolescent psychiatric inpatient unit. The secondary purpose was to assess whether changes in PRN sedation were related to changing patient characteristics. METHODS: A retrospective chart review examined 257 medical charts from a child and youth mental health inpatient service over two time periods (wave I, n = 122; wave II, n = 135) and collected data on PRN sedation, patient characteristics and routine medications. RESULTS: Over time a significant reduction was observed in the proportion of patients prescribed PRN sedation from 70% to 54% (p < 0.01), and a reduction in the proportion of patients given PRN sedation from 46% to 26% (p < 0.01). The most commonly administered drug was chlorpromazine in wave I, and diazepam in wave II. Multivariate analysis indicated that reductions in PRN sedation occurred independently of changes in patient characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: High utilization rates of PRN sedation are not inevitable in a child and adolescent psychiatric inpatient unit and may be reduced over time. Changing utilization of PRN sedation occurred independently from changing patient characteristics. More treatment outcome studies are required to optimize use of PRN sedation in young people.