Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41736837›Full record

ReviewAustralian prescriber2026

Supporting the appropriate use of psychotropic medicines in aged and disability care.

Stephen Macfarlane, Julian N Trollor, Rebecca Koncz, Maria Sukkar, Carolyn Hullick

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Australian prescriber, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Stephen MacfarlaneDementia Support Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1347-4945
Julian N TrollorDementia Support Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7685-2977
Rebecca KonczDementia Support Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1412-1423
Maria SukkarDementia Support Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4591-2399
Carolyn HullickDementia Support Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6157-8880

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Royal Commissions into the aged-care and disability sectors revealed significant concerns about the inappropriate use of psychotropic medicines as chemical restraint in people with cognitive disability or impairment. In response, the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care developed the Psychotropic Medicines in Cognitive Disability or Impairment Clinical Care Standard (the Standard), aiming to guide psychotropic use and ensure best practice in supporting people with cognitive disability or impairment. This article provides an overview of the Standard and its application in the aged-care and disability sectors. The Standard promotes person-centred care and prioritises thorough assessment, non-medication strategies, and the development of individual behaviour support plans before considering psychotropic medicines. It encourages healthcare services to have clear policies around psychotropic use, including the need for documentation of non-medication strategies trialled before such use, and for monitoring the effectiveness of any psychotropic medicine prescribed. Informed consent is a regulatory requirement before using psychotropic medicines as a form of restrictive practice. Clear treatment goals, clinical handover during transitions of care, and regular psychotropic review and deprescribing are emphasised in the Standard to minimise harm, particularly in cases of long-term use and psychotropic polypharmacy.

Indexed as

aged carechemical restraintcognitive disabilitycognitive impairmentdementiapsychotropic drugs

Identifiers

PMID41736837
PMCPMC12928841

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.