Implementation of a Sensory Room in a Psychiatric Intensive Care Unit: A Mixed-Methods Study.
Suzanne Dawson, Amy Hawke, Lemma Bulto and 3 others
PMID 40745971WHAT IT FOUND
The sensory room did not show a reduction in as-needed medication or seclusion use in a psychiatric intensive care unit.
Consumers and staff valued it as a calming, safe space, but staffing demands, location and training barriers limited uptake.
Key findings
01PRN medication use remained relatively stable over the three time points (F(2,3)=0.23, p=0.807), and seclusion use decreased from 75.0 to 12.8 episodes per 1000 occupied bed days at the first follow-up but did not reach statistical significance (F(2,3)=0.45, p=0.677).
02Consumers described the sensory room as a whole-body experience that helped mood, sleep and emotions, and many said it was a safe place to withdraw from the ward.
03The two-staff requirement, room location, noise, limited equipment variety and staff knowledge gaps were major barriers to use.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study was done in one 8-bed PICU in Adelaide, so the findings may not transfer to units with different staffing, space or clinical practices. There was no comparison group, so changes over time cannot be attributed to the sensory room. The researchers could not record how often consumers used the room, so uptake and dose are unclear. Consumers were not involved in designing or conducting the project. In a small unit, one or two people could strongly influence PRN and seclusion rates, possibly hiding or creating changes. The room was an office off a corridor, required two staff to stay with the person, and had the door open, which may have limited use and shaped experiences.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The study was funded by the Flinders Foundation and the Hospital Research Foundation Group.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the drop in seclusion from 75.0 to 12.8 episodes per 1000 occupied bed days as evidence that the sensory room reduced seclusion. That change was not statistically significant (p = 0.677), PRN use did not change, and the study had no comparison group.