Back

Adverse mental health inpatient experiences: Qualitative systematic review of international literature and development of a conceptual framework

Hallett, N.; Dickinson, R.; Eneje, E.; Dickens, G. L.

2023-10-20 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.1101/2023.10.20.23297217 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundTrauma is increasingly linked to poor health outcomes. Adverse experiences in mental health inpatient settings can be traumatic and contribute to long-lasting negative effects like post-traumatic stress disorder. However, the full range of relevant experiences is often unaddressed in service design and delivery. AimTo describe the spectrum of negative experiences that people identify while they are inpatients in adult mental health services. MethodA systematic literature review was conducted to identify qualitative studies that included peoples subjective negative reports of their inpatient admissions. CINAHL, MEDLINE and PsycINFO were searched from 2000 onwards, alongside a search of Google Scholar. The quality of studies was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative checklist. Data were synthesised using the best-fit framework synthesis approach. A patient and public involvement reference group contributed to the review. ResultsStudies (111) from 25 countries were included. Adverse mental health inpatient experiences can be conceptualised under three headings: the ecosystem (the physical environment and the resources available, and other people within or influential to that environment); systems (processes and transitions); and the individual (encroachments on autonomy and traumatisation). ConclusionsImproved patient experience is associated with improved patient outcomes, and addressing negative experiences could significantly impact patient care. Mental health professionals should strive to create inpatient environments that are supportive, respectful, and safe for patients, which consideration of the adversity framework developed from this review can facilitate.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.2%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 16%
12.3%
3
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 2%
9.0%
4
BMC Psychiatry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.0%
5
Psychiatry Research
35 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.3%
50% of probability mass above
6
Frontiers in Psychiatry
83 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
7.1%
7
BJPsych Open
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
8
Journal of Affective Disorders
81 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.2%
9
The British Journal of Psychiatry
21 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.6%
10
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
11
Journal of Psychiatric Research
28 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
12
Acta Neuropsychiatrica
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
13
BMJ Mental Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
14
European Psychiatry
10 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
15
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
16
Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.5%
17
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
18
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 73%
0.8%
19
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
20
Brain and Behavior
37 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
21
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.6%