Reducing conflict and containment rates on acute psychiatric wards: The Safewards cluster randomised controlled trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Acute psychiatric wards manage patients whose actions may threaten safety (conflict). Staff act to avert or minimise harm (containment). The Safewards model enabled the identification of ten interventions to reduce the frequency of both.Objective
To test the efficacy of these interventions.Design
A pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial with psychiatric hospitals and wards as the units of randomisation. The main outcomes were rates of conflict and containment.Participants
Staff and patients in 31 randomly chosen wards at 15 randomly chosen hospitals.Results
For shifts with conflict or containment incidents, the experimental condition reduced the rate of conflict events by 15% (95% CI 5.7-23.7%) [corrected] relative to the control intervention. The rate of containment events for the experimental intervention was reduced by 23.2% (95% CI 9.9-35.5%). [corrected]Conclusions
Simple interventions aiming to improve staff relationships with patients can reduce the frequency of conflict and containment.Trial registration
IRSCTN38001825.
SUBMITTER: Bowers L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4518134 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Reducing conflict and containment rates on acute psychiatric wards: The Safewards cluster randomised controlled trial.
Bowers Len L James Karen K Quirk Alan A Simpson Alan A Stewart Duncan D Hodsoll John J
International journal of nursing studies 20150901 9
<h4>Background</h4>Acute psychiatric wards manage patients whose actions may threaten safety (conflict). Staff act to avert or minimise harm (containment). The Safewards model enabled the identification of ten interventions to reduce the frequency of both.<h4>Objective</h4>To test the efficacy of these interventions.<h4>Design</h4>A pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial with psychiatric hospitals and wards as the units of randomisation. The main outcomes were rates of conflict and contai ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundSuicidal behaviour is common in acute psychiatric wards resulting in distress, and burden for patients, carers and society. Although psychological therapies for suicidal behaviour are effective in out-patient settings, there is little research on their effectiveness for in-patients who are suicidal.AimsOur primary objective was to determine whether cognitive-behavioural suicide prevention therapy (CBSP) was feasible and acceptable, compared with treatment as usual (TAU) for in-patients who are suicidal. Secondary aims were to assess the impact of CBSP on suicidal thinking, behaviours, functioning, quality of life, service use, cost-effectiveness and psychological factors associated with suicide.MethodA single-blind pilot randomised controlled trial comparing TAU to TAU plus CBSP in in-patients in acute psychiatric wards who are suicidal (the Inpatient Suicide Intervention and Therapy Evaluation (INSITE) trial, trial registration: ISRCTN17890126). The intervention consisted of TAU plus up to 20 CBSP sessions, over 6 months continuing in the community following discharge. Participants were assessed at baseline and at 6 weeks and 6 months post-baseline.ResultsA total of 51 individuals were randomised (27 to TAU, 24 to TAU plus CBSP) of whom 37 were followed up at 6 months (19 in TAU, 18 in TAU plus CBSP). Engagement, attendance, safety and user feedback indicated that the addition of CBSP to TAU for in-patients who are acutely suicidal was feasible and acceptable while on in-patient wards and following discharge. Economic analysis suggests the intervention could be cost-effective.DiscussionPsychological therapy can be delivered safely to patients who are suicidal although modifications are required for this setting. Findings indicate a larger, definitive trial should be conducted.Declaration of interestThe trial was hosted by Greater Manchester Mental health NHS Trust (formerly, Manchester Mental Health and Social Care NHS Trust). The authors are affiliated to the University of Manchester, Greater Manchester Mental Health Foundation Trust, Lancashire Care NHS Foundation trust and the Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre. Y.A. is a trustee for a North-West England branch of the charity Mind.
| S-EPMC6381415 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsAlthough shared decision-making (SDM) has the potential to improve health outcomes, psychiatrists often exclude patients with more severe mental illnesses or more acute conditions from participation in treatment decisions. This study examines whether SDM is facilitated by an approach which is specifically adapted to the needs of acutely ill patients (SDM-PLUS).MethodsThe study is a multi-centre, cluster-randomised, non-blinded, controlled trial of SDM-PLUS in 12 acute psychiatric wards of five psychiatric hospitals addressing inpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. All patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were consecutively recruited for the trial at the time of their admission to the ward. Treatment teams of intervention wards were trained in the SDM-PLUS approach through participation in two half-day workshops. Patients on intervention wards received group training in SDM. Staff (and patients) of the control wards acted under 'treatment as usual' conditions. The primary outcome parameter was the patients' perceived involvement in decision-making at 3 weeks after study enrolment, analysed using a random-effects linear regression model.ResultsIn total, 161 participants each were recruited in the intervention and control group. SDM-PLUS led to higher perceived involvement in decision-making (primary outcome, analysed patients n = 257, mean group difference 16.5, 95% CI 9.0-24.0, p = 0.002, adjusted for baseline differences: β 17.3, 95% CI 10.8-23.6, p = 0.0004). In addition, intervention group patients exhibited better therapeutic alliance, treatment satisfaction and self-rated medication compliance during inpatient stay. There were, however, no significant improvements in adherence and rehospitalisation rates in the 6- and 12-month follow-up.ConclusionsDespite limitations in patient recruitment, the SDM-PLUS trial has shown that the adoption of behavioural approaches (e.g. motivational interviewing) for SDM may yield a successful application to mental health. The authors recommend strategies to ensure effects are not lost at the interface between in- and outpatient treatment.Trial registration: The trial was registered at Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien (DRKS00010880).
| S-EPMC7303792 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There has been ongoing debate regarding the impact of reductions in psychiatric beds on suicide rates, and the potential effect of reallocation of acute hospital funding to community-based mental health programs and services. Computer simulation offers significant value in advancing such debate by providing a robust platform for exploring strategic resource allocation scenarios before they are implemented in the real world. We report an application that demonstrates a threshold effect of cuts to psychiatric beds on suicide rates and the role of context specific variations in population, behavioral, and service use dynamics in determining where that threshold lies. Findings have important implications for regional decision-making regarding resource allocation for suicide prevention.
| S-EPMC6615492 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Safewards model aims to reduce conflict and use of containment on psychiatric wards. To evaluate the implementation of Safewards and understand why it is effective in some settings but not in others, it is important to assess the level of implementation fidelity. To do this, the Safewards Fidelity Checklist (SFC) is often used, which focuses on objective visual observations of interventions but does not include patient responsiveness. The latter is a key indicator of implementation fidelity and includes engagement, relevance, acceptability and usefulness. The aim of the present study was to investigate the fidelity of Safewards implementation on an acute psychiatric ward from the perspective of patient responsiveness.MethodThe study was conducted on a ward for patients with mainly affective disorders. To assess the general level of fidelity the SFC was used together with a detailed ward walkthrough. Ten patients were interviewed with a focus on patient responsiveness to each of the seven interventions implemented on the ward. Data were analysed using qualitative descriptive analysis.ResultsThe findings indicate high implementation fidelity, which was reflected in the SFC assessment, walkthrough and patient responsiveness. Patients gave examples of improvements that had happened over time or of the ward being better than other wards. They felt respected, less alone, hopeful and safe. They also described supporting fellow patients and taking responsibility for the ward climate. However, some patients were unfamiliar with a ward where so much communication was expected. Several suggestions were made about improving Safewards.ConclusionsThis study confirms previous research that patient responsiveness is an important factor for achieving fidelity in a prevention programme. The patients' descriptions of the acceptability, relevance and usefulness of the specific interventions reflected to a high degree the objective visual observations made by means of the SFC and ward walkthrough. Patient engagement was demonstrated by several suggestions about how to adapt the interventions. There is potential to obtain valuable input from patients when adapting Safewards in practice. This study also presents many examples of practical work with these interventions and the effects it can have on patients' experiences of care.
| S-EPMC11321007 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveMost guidelines for the management of aggressive behavior in acute psychiatric patients describe the use of de-escalation as the first-choice method, but the evidence for its effectiveness is inconsistent. The aim of the study was to assess the effect of verbal and non-verbal de-escalation on the incidence and severity of aggression and the use of physical restraints in acute psychiatric wards.MethodsA multi-center cluster randomized study was conducted in the acute wards of all psychiatric hospitals in Slovenia. The research was carried out in two phases, a baseline period of five consecutive months and an intervention period of the same five consecutive months in the following year. The intervention was implemented after the baseline period and included training in verbal and non-verbal de-escalation techniques for the staff teams on experimental wards.ResultsIn the baseline study period, there were no significant differences in the incidence of aggressive behavior and physical restraints between the experimental and control groups. The incidence rates of aggressive events, severe aggressive events, and physical restraints per 100 treatment days decreased significantly after the intervention. Compared to the control group, the incidence rate of aggressive events was 73% lower in the experimental group (IRR = 0.268, 95% CI [0.221; 0.342]), while the rate of severe events was 86% lower (IRR = 0.142, 95% CI [0.107; 0.189]). During the intervention period, the incidence rate of physical restraints due to aggression in the experimental group decreased to 30% of the rate in the control group (IRR = 0.304, 95% CI [0.238; 0.386]). No reduction in the incidence of restraint used for reasons unrelated to aggression was observed. After the intervention, a statistically significant decrease in the severity of aggressive incidents (p < 0.001) was observed, while the average duration of restraint episodes did not decrease.ConclusionDe-escalation training is effective in reducing the incidence and severity of aggression and the use of physical restraints in acute psychiatric units.Clinical trial registration[www.ClinicalTrials.gov], identifier [NCT05166278].
| S-EPMC9021532 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC5663333 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCommunity-based obesity prevention interventions are often commissioned despite the limited evidence base. HENRY (Health, Exercise, Nutrition for the Really Young) is a programme delivered to parents of preschool children across the UK. Early evidence suggests that it may be effective, but a robust evaluation has not been conducted. We initiated a systematic evaluation of HENRY by studying the feasibility of conducting a multi-centre definitive trial to evaluate its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to prevent obesity. Objectives were to assess the feasibility of recruiting local authorities, centres and parents; test processes and time required to train and certify intervention staff; explore HENRY commissioning processes; identify potential sources (and associated impact) of contamination; and consider the feasibility of trial procedures.MethodsWe conducted a multi-centre, open labelled, two group, prospective, cluster randomised, controlled, feasibility study, with embedded process evaluation and pre-defined criteria for progression to definitive trial. We sought to recruit 120 parents from 12 children's centres, across two UK local authority (government) areas. Within each local authority, we planned to randomise three centres to HENRY and three to 'standard care' control. Our plan was to collect data in family homes at baseline and 12 months, including parent and child height and weight, and parent-reported questionnaires on self-efficacy, feeding, eating habits, quality of life and resource use. Contamination, implementation and study acceptability were explored using parent interviews.ResultsWe recruited two local authorities and 12 children's centres within eight months. One hundred and seventeen parents were recruited (average 3.9 parents per programme) and follow-up data were collected from 85% of participants. Process data from 20 parents and 24 members of staff indicate that both would benefit from more detail about their involvement as participants, but that methods were acceptable. Contamination was likely, though the impact of this on behaviour was unclear.ConclusionOur findings indicate that a cluster RCT of HENRY to assess its effect on childhood obesity prevention is feasible. This study has allowed us to design a pragmatic definitive trial with minimal bias, taking account of lessons learnt from conducting evaluation research in public health settings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03333733 registered 6th November 2017.
| S-EPMC7908721 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn the UK and beyond, public funding is used to commission interventions delivered in public health early years settings aimed at improving health and well-being and reducing inequalities in order to promote school readiness. This is a key setting for obesity prevention programmes, which are often commissioned despite the limited evidence base. The HENRY (Health, Exercise, Nutrition for the Really Young) programme is an 8-week programme delivered to parents of preschool children, designed to support families to optimise healthy weight behaviours. Early evidence suggests that it may be effective, but a robust evaluation using a randomised controlled design has not been conducted. This study begins this process by evaluating the feasibility of conducting a multi-centre definitive trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HENRY to prevent obesity in the early years.MethodsThis is a multi-centre, open labelled, two group, prospective, cluster randomised, controlled, feasibility study aiming to recruit 120 parents from 12 children's centres, based in two local authority areas. Within each of the two local authorities, three centres will be randomised to HENRY and three will be randomised to a control arm of standard care (usual provision of services within children's centres). We will explore HENRY commissioning, provision and delivery and assess the feasibility of local authority, centre and parent recruitment, the processes and time required to train and certify staff to deliver the intervention, the potential sources (and associated risk) of contamination and the feasibility of the trial procedures. Research includes a process evaluation, feasibility of cost-effectiveness evaluation, with progression to the definitive trial judged against pre-defined criteria.DiscussionThis feasibility study will support the decision to proceed to, and the design of, a future definitive trial, providing an evidence base of an approach to prevent childhood obesity, which has been deemed attractive to all stakeholders, including parents. Given the widespread adoption of the intervention, this has the potential to impact on public health in the UK and beyond.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03333733 registered 6th November 2017Protocol date: 25th October 2017Protocol version: 4.0.
| S-EPMC6013860 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Through the Safer Wards project we aimed to reduce the number of incidents of physical violence on older people's mental health wards. This was done using quality improvement methods and supported by the Trust's extensive programme of quality improvement, including training provided by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Violence can be an indicator of unmet needs in this patient population, with a negative effect on patient care and staff morale. Reducing harm to patients and staff is a strategic aim of our Trust. We established a multi-disciplinary group who led on the project on each ward and used a Pareto diagram to establish the focus of our work. We established a dashboard of measures based on our incident reporting system Datix, including number of incidents of violence, days between incidents, days of staff sickness, days between staff injury, use of restraint, and use of rapid tranquilisation (the last two being balancing measures in the reduction of violence). Each team identified factors driving physical violence on the wards, under headings of unmet patient needs, staff needs and staff awareness, which included lack of activity and a safe and therapeutic environment. Using driver diagrams, we identified change ideas that included hourly rounding (proactive checks on patient well-being), the addition of sensory rooms, flexible leave for patients, and a structured activity programme. We also introduced exercise to music, therapeutic groups led by patients, and focused on discharge planning and pet therapy, each of which starting sequentially over the course of a one year period from late 2013 and subject to a cycle of iterative learning using PDSA methods. The specific aim was a 20% decrease in violent incidents on three wards in City and Hackney, and Newham. Following our interventions, days between violent incidents increased from an average of three to an average of six. Days between staff injury due to physical violence rose from an average of eight (one violent incident resulting in staff injury every eight days) to 22 (one incident every 22 days). Incidents of physical violence reduced from 63 in 2013 to 39 in 2014. We were also able to quantify reduced costs associated with reduction in violence. The success of this project in our view lay in the involvement of ward staff in understanding the problems and generating local solutions which were also broadly evidenced based. Patients were also closely involved in generating ideas. We are currently incorporating much of this work into routine practice in order to sustain improvement, as well as continuing to generate new ideas for further improvement while using the skills learnt in this process to address other problems.
| S-EPMC4645881 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundConsensus on what outcomes should be included in trials of psychological therapies on acute psychiatric inpatient wards is currently lacking. Inclusion of different viewpoints, including service user perspectives, is crucial in ensuring that future trials measure outcomes which are meaningful and important. Development of a Core Outcome Set (COS), a minimum standardised set of outcomes to be measured and reported, would help improve synthesis and interpretation of clinical trial data in this area.MethodsStage 1 of the COS development involved compiling a comprehensive long-list of outcomes from key sources including i) a systematic review of outcomes from published trials, ii) online survey of key stakeholders (service users, carers, healthcare professionals, researchers, and end users of research), iii) qualitative interviews with service users and carers. Stage 2 involved stakeholder groups short-listing the outcomes using consensus methods (e-Delphi survey). The final outcome set was derived from the short-list at a consensus meeting of stakeholders, facilitated by an Independent Chair.ResultsA long-list of 68 outcomes was compiled from the systematic review (n = 30 trials), online stakeholder survey (n = 100 participants) and qualitative interviews (n = 15 participants). Fifty stakeholders took part in the e-Delphi study, where the long-list was cut down to a short-list of 12 outcomes over 2 rounds. Nine stakeholders took part in the final consensus meeting, and after some outcomes were removed and/or amalgamated, a final set of 6 outcomes was recommended for inclusion in the COS. These were Ability to Cope, Hopefulness, Quality of Life, Psychosis Symptoms, Mood, and Self-Harm Behaviours.ConclusionsWidespread future adoption of the COS will reduce research waste by ensuring that outcomes are more easily comparable across trials, and that the full range of stakeholder priorities are represented in trial outcomes. This makes it more likely that effective therapies will be identified in a timely fashion and successfully implemented in routine clinical practice. The final 6-outcome COS should be feasible to implement given the need keep participant burden to a minimum in inpatient trials. Further work is needed to make recommendations for the best outcome measurement instruments to use, including the use of patient-reported outcomes alongside clinician-rated measures.Trial registrationNot applicable.
| S-EPMC11575046 | biostudies-literature