ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2018
Reduced Frequency of Cases with Seclusion Is Associated with "Opening the Doors" of a Psychiatric Intensive Care Unit.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2018. 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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Open doors in psychiatric hospitals : An overview of empirical findings].Der Nervenarzt · 2019Pooled it
- Patient-related characteristics or local tradition: what predicts the admission to a locked ward or the use of coercive measures in psychiatric inpatient treatment?European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2025Observational
- Prevalence and risk factors for seclusion and restraint: results of a retrospective analysis.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- The association between the admission to wards with open- vs. closed-door policy and the use of coercive measures.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Does ending night-confinement reduce use of seclusion and prevalence of violence in a forensic psychiatric hospital? A retrospective observational study.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2023Article
- Article
- Approval of Coercion in Psychiatry in Public Perception and the Role of Stigmatization.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- [Six years of open-door policy at the University Psychiatric Hospital Basel].Der Nervenarzt · 2019Observational
- Narrative Case Notes Have the Potential to Predict Seclusion 3 Days in Advance: A Mixed-Method Analysis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2019Article
- Reliability of Paper-Based Routine Documentation in Psychiatric Inpatient Care and Recommendations for Further Improvement.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2019Article
- Could Animal-Assisted Therapy Help to Reduce Coercive Treatment in Psychiatry?Frontiers in psychiatry · 2019Review
- Compulsory Admission to Psychiatric Wards-Who Is Admitted, and Who Appeals Against Admission?Frontiers in psychiatry · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImplementing an open door policy is a complex intervention comprising changes in therapeutic stance, team processes, and a change from locked to open doors. Recent studies show that it can lead to a reduction of seclusion and forced medication, but the role of the physical change of door status is still unclear.
aimsThe aims of this study is to examine the transition from closed to predominantly open doors on a psychiatric intensive care unit (PICU) and its associations with the frequency of seclusion and forced medication.
methodA PICU at the Department of Adult Psychiatry, University of Basel, Switzerland, implemented evidence-based strategies for operating an open door policy within the context of acute psychiatry and participated in a hospital-wide implementation of an open door policy before changing door status. 131 inpatient cases hospitalized on this PICU were examined regarding the frequency of seclusion and forced medication using explorative analyses over a time span of 32 weeks (16 weeks after implementation of the new treatment concept but before door opening, 16 weeks after door opening).
resultsFollowing door status change, the PICU was completely open on 51% of the days and partly open on 23% of the days. The mean number of open hours per day was 12.8 ± 3.9 h. The frequency of forced medication did not change, and the frequency of seclusion decreased significantly [χ
conclusionThis pilot study underlines the potential of a change of door status to attain a reduction in safety measures in the first 4 months.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.