Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31088418›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2019

Open doors by fair means: Study protocol for a 3-year prospective controlled study with a quasi-experimental design towards (or to implement) an open Ward policy in acute care units.

Lisa K Schreiber, Florian G Metzger, Tobias A Duncker, Andreas J Fallgatter, Tilman Steinert

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
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

5 authors.

Lisa K SchreiberUniversity Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy Tuebingen, Calwerstr. 14, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany. lisa.schreiber@med.uni-tuebingen.de.ORCID 0000-0002-9963-8471
Florian G MetzgerUniversity Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy Tuebingen, Calwerstr. 14, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany.
Tobias A DunckerFalkenried Caduceus Klinik, Niendorfer Weg 5, 29549, Bad Bevensen, Germany.
Andreas J FallgatterUniversity Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy Tuebingen, Calwerstr. 14, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany.
Tilman SteinertCenters for Psychiatry Suedwuerttemberg, Ulm University, Ravensburg-Weissenau, Weingartshofer Str. 2, 88214, Ravensburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcute psychiatric wards in Germany are often locked due to the assumption that opening could endanger patients and society. On the contrary, some findings suggest that aversive events such as absconding and attempted suicides do not occur more often on wards with an open-door policy. However, these data are probably biased with regard to differing patient populations on open and locked wards. To our best knowledge, the present study is the first prospective controlled study with a quasi-experimental design dealing with this issue.

methodsThis study investigates whether indicators of an open-door policy, as measured by a priori determined outcomes, can be improved by a defined complex intervention on two intervention wards in two psychiatric hospitals, compared to two control wards with otherwise very similar conditions. Both hospitals contain two wards identical in structure and patient admittance policies, so that a similar study protocol can be followed with similar patient populations. Both hospitals have a defined catchment area and receive voluntary and involuntary admissions. In a baseline phase, wards will be opened facultatively (i.e., if it seems possible to staff). In the following intervention period, one ward per hospital will establish an enhanced open-door policy by applying additional strategic and personnel support. As a control group, the control ward will continue to be opened facultatively. After one year, control wards will be opened according to the open-door policy as well. Interventions will include the continuous identification of patients at risk as well as the development of individual care concepts and additional staffing. For this purpose, nursing and medical staff will be methodically supported on an ongoing basis by study staff. Outcomes variables will be the percentage of door opening on each ward between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., the percentage of all treatment days with the door opened and the number of involuntary treatment days with open doors. Data on frequencies of aggressive incidents, absconding, police searches, and seclusion or restraint will be used as control variables. Additional costs will be calculated. DISCUSSION: Treating mentally ill patients on locked wards is a highly relevant and critically discussed topic. In particular, it is controversially discussed whether changes in door policy can be established without increasing risks to patients and others. This study aims to gain robust data on this issue, going beyond beliefs and questionable retrospective observational studies.

trial registrationOur trial "Open Doors By Fair Means" is retrospectively registered with DRKS (DRKS00015154) on Sept. 10th 2018 and displayed on the public web site. It is searchable via its Meta-registry ( http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/ ).

Indexed as

Hospitals, PsychiatricMental DisordersPsychiatric Department, HospitalControlled Clinical Trials as TopicFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMulticenter Studies as TopicPatient AdmissionProspective StudiesRestraint, PhysicalRetrospective StudiesAbscondingCoercive measuresCompulsory treatmentOpen door policyPsychiatryRestraintSafetySuicideWardWard atmosphereWard climate

Identifiers

PMID31088418
PMCPMC6518814

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.