Back

Safety in Adolescent Behavioral Health Crisis Units: A Qualitative Analysis of Clinicians Versus Designers Perspectives

Jafarifiroozabadi, R.; Patel, H.; Clements, P. T.

2026-01-30 health systems and quality improvement
10.64898/2026.01.28.26345086 medRxiv
Show abstract

Safety is a foundational concern in adolescent behavioral health crisis units (BHCUs), where therapeutic care must be delivered in complex, rapidly evolving environments. However, limited research has explored how key personnel involved in shaping the environment of care in such units, such as clinicians and healthcare designers, understand and prioritize safety. To address this gap, one-hour, online semi-structured interviews were conducted with a panel of experts (N = 13) at a national level in the U.S., comprising of eight designers (healthcare designers and medical planners) and five clinicians (psychologists and psychiatric nurses) actively involved in designing or construction of BHCUs or providing care in these units for adolescent patients in the past five years. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed via MAXQDA (2024) for qualitative content analysis. Analysis of interviews revealed 592 codes forming four preliminary categories related to safety in adolescent BHCUs: 1) Barriers and facilitators to patient safety and comfort (f = 52%), 2) Care processes and clinical workflows (f = 21%), 3) Care outcomes (f = 19%), and 4) Laws, regulations, and guidelines (f = 7%). Findings highlighted several points of divergence in clinicians versus designers perception of safety related to environmental features, such as nursing station designs, patients access and control over unit features, and furniture type or layout in the unit. Results also showed differences in understanding care processes and outcomes related to safety among the two groups. Addressing such discrepancies can contribute to the development of safer BHCUs that support adolescents healing.

Matching journals

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

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 13%
14.4%
2
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.5%
3
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
10.1%
4
BMJ Open Quality
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.1%
5
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
7.2%
50% of probability mass above
6
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 3%
6.4%
7
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.9%
8
BMC Psychiatry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.9%
9
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness
16 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.1%
10
Health Expectations
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
11
Journal of General Internal Medicine
20 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
12
Frontiers in Digital Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
13
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
14
JMIRx Med
31 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
15
BJPsych Open
25 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
16
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
17
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
18
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
19
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
20
BMC Geriatrics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
21
SSM - Population Health
17 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
22
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 75%
0.7%
23
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%