ArticleThe mental health clinician2021
Impact of holding home stimulant(s) on agitation in a child and adolescent inpatient psychiatric population.
Article in The mental health clinician, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to compare the rates of agitation-related interventions associated with initial holding versus continuation of home stimulant(s) in a child and adolescent population at the time of admission to an inpatient psychiatric facility.
methodsThis retrospective chart review included patients less than 18 years of age who were admitted to an academic medical center between July 1, 2017, and July 1, 2018. Patients were divided into 2 groups: those continued on their home stimulant(s) and those who had them held. We compared both groups on agitation-related outcomes by examining the difference in the number of level I or II events or as-needed medication administrations. Mechanical restraints and closed-door seclusions were grouped as level I events, and level II events consisted of nonmechanical restraint.
resultsThe analysis included 169 patients. In total, 126 (75%) patients were continued on their home stimulant, and 43 (25%) had them held. The occurrence of the composite endpoint of level I or II events or as-needed intramuscular medication administration was numerically higher in the group that had their home stimulant held (27.9% vs 23%; DISCUSSION: The composite outcome of as-needed intramuscular medication administration and level I or II events was numerically higher in the group that had their home stimulant held. Use of a larger sample size and adjusted analyses may help elucidate covariates that impact agitation-related outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.