Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T12:48:56.112Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A Comparison of the Number of Referrals for Psychiatric Assessment and Prescribing Rates of Psychotropic Medication in the Year Leading Up to the COVID-19 Pandemic and the First Year of the Pandemic in a Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) in South Edinburgh

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2023

Steven Voy*
Affiliation:
NHS Fife, Kirkaldy, United Kingdom
Clare Robinson
Affiliation:
NHS Education for Scotland, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Sarah Blue
Affiliation:
NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
*
*Corresponding author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims

To establish if there were any significant changes in the number of referrals for psychiatric assessment or prescribing rates of psychotropic medication in the South Edinburgh tier 3 CAMHS team during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the previous year. To explore factors that might be responsible for these changes.

Methods

Referrals to the Psychiatric Assessment Clinic were analysed between the periods of 23rd March 2019 and 22nd March 2020 and 23rd March 2020 to 22nd March 2021. Using the unique numeric patient identifier, data from these referrals was gathered retrospectively by looking at clinical documentation on the healthcare information system used across NHS Lothian. Data were gathered for 243 patients.

Data were collected on psychiatric diagnosis and, if medication was prescribed, what class of medication this was. Information on potential confounding factors was also gathered including sex, age, co-morbid psychiatric diagnoses, history of self-harming behaviours and suicide attempts, family set-up, schooling and other support services involved. Information was stored anonymously.

Data were coded. Statistical analysis was undertaken using SPSS (statistical package for the social sciences).

Results

Referrals for psychiatric assessment almost doubled from 83 pre-pandemic to 160 during the first year of the pandemic. Referral rates for most psychiatric disorders increased. The proportion of patients prescribed psychotropic medication increased significantly during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the year preceding (P=0.031).

Analysis of possible confounding factors was completed. Anti-depressant prescribing rates for those from non-nuclear families increased significantly in the year during the pandemic (P=0.012). Other differences were observed but these were not statistically significant. The numbers of patients who self-harmed, attempted suicide or carried out both increased from 42 to 79.

Conclusion

Findings add to the existing body of literature highlighting an increase in referrals to mental health services and prescribing of psychotropic medications in the first year of the pandemic in comparison to those pre-pandemic. No clear conclusions could be drawn about factors responsible for change. Continuing to monitor referrals and confounding factors over time would be useful from a public health perspective. It would allow trends to be drawn so that planning can be carried out for future pandemics.

Type
Service Evaluation
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NC
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. This does not need to be placed under each abstract, just each page is fine.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Royal College of Psychiatrists

Footnotes

Abstracts were reviewed by the RCPsych Academic Faculty rather than by the standard BJPsych Open peer review process and should not be quoted as peer-reviewed by BJPsych Open in any subsequent publication.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.