Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23566256›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2013

Implementation of a smoke-free policy in a high secure mental health inpatient facility: staff survey to describe experience and attitudes.

Angela M Hehir, Devon Indig, Shani Prosser, Vicki A Archer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Prison Staff and Prisoner Views on a Prison Smoking Ban: Evidence From the Tobacco in Prisons Study.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2019
    Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Strategies to deal with comorbid physical illness in psychosis.Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2016
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Achieving smoke-free mental health services: lessons from the past decade of implementation research.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2013
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Angela M HehirCentre for Health Research in Criminal Justice, Justice and Forensic Mental Health Network-J&FMHN, Suite 302, Level 2, 152 Bunnerong Rd, Eastgardens, NSW 2036, Australia. Angela.Hehir@justicehealth.nsw.gov.au
Devon Indig
Shani Prosser
Vicki A Archer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2008, a new forensic hospital was opened as a totally smoke-free facility. This study describes the attitudes and experience of mental health professionals working in the high secure mental health facility three years after it was opened. It is part of a larger evaluation describing the experience of current and discharged hospital patients.

methodsQuantitative data was collected using a survey of hospital staff (N = 111) with a 50% response rate. The survey collected demographic and smoking data to describe staff responses to statements relating to hospital smoking policy, patient care and staff support.

resultsAmong staff surveyed, 13% were current smokers and 41% were ex-smokers (10% quit after commencing employment in the smoke-free hospital). Most (88%) preferred to work in a smoke-free environment, although this was significantly lower in smokers compared to non-smokers (39% vs. 95%). While most staff felt that the smoke-free environment had a positive impact on the health of patients (86%) and on themselves (79%), smokers were significantly less likely to agree. Just over half (57%) of staff surveyed agreed that patient care was easier in a totally smoke-free environment, although less smokers agreed compared to non-smokers. Staff who smoked were also significantly less likely to indicate they had sufficient support working in a smoke-free environment, compared to non-smokers (15% vs. 38%).

conclusionsThe staff surveyed supported the smoke-free workplace policy; most agreed that patient care was easier and that the policy did not lead to an increase in patient aggression. Implementation of a total smoking ban can result in positive health outcomes for patients and staff, and may influence some staff to quit. Staff who smoke have a less positive experience of the policy and require additional support.

Indexed as

Health Plan ImplementationHospitals, PsychiatricAdolescentAdultAgedAustraliaFemaleHealth Care SurveysHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInpatientsMaleMedical Staff, HospitalMiddle AgedOccupational Health ServicesOrganizational PolicyTobacco Smoke Pollution

Identifiers

PMID23566256
PMCPMC3648483

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.