ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2019
"But I did not touch nobody!"-Patients' and nurses' perspectives and recommendations after aggression on psychiatric wards-A qualitative study.
Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Patient safety incidents in the psychiatric inpatient setting: determinants, consequences, and strategies. A systematic review.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Pooled it
- De-escalating aggression in acute inpatient mental health settings: a behaviour change theory-informed, secondary qualitative analysis of staff and patient perspectives.BMC psychiatry · 2024Article
- Perceptions of patient aggression in psychiatric hospitals: a qualitative study using focus groups with nurses, patients, and informal caregivers.BMC psychiatry · 2022Article
- [Post-seclusion/post-restraint debriefing with patients-overview and current situation].Der Nervenarzt · 2021Review
- "But I did not touch nobody!"-Patients' and nurses' perspectives and recommendations after aggression on psychiatric wards-A qualitative study.Journal of advanced nursing · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo gain a deeper understanding of the differences in patients and staff perspectives in response to aggression and to explore recommendations on prevention.
designQualitative, grounded theory study.
methodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with patients and nurses involved in an aggressive incident. Data collection was performed from May 2016 - March 2017.
resultsThirty-one interviews were conducted concerning 15 aggressive incidents. Patients and nurses generally showed agreement on the factual course of events, there was variation in agreement on the perceived severity (PS). Patients' recommendations on prevention were mostly personally focussed, while nurses suggested general improvements.
conclusionPatients are often capable to evaluate aggression and give recommendations on prevention shortly after the incident. Patients and nurses differ in the PS of aggression. Recommendations on prevention of patients and nurses are complementary. IMPACT: What problem did the study address? Perspectives of patients and nurses differ with respect to aggression, but how is unclear. What were the main findings? Patients and nurses generally described a similar factual course of events concerning the incident, patients often perceive the severity less than nurses. Patients are capable to give recommendations on prevention of aggressive incidents, shortly after the incident. Where and on whom will the research have impact? Factual course of events can be a common ground to start evaluating aggressive incidents and post-incident review should address the severity of incidents. Asking recommendations from patients on how to improve safety and de-escalation can lead to innovative and personal de-escalation strategies and supports patients autonomy.
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.