Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39478622›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

A qualitative investigation of crisis cafés in England: their role, implementation, and accessibility.

Heather Staples, Gianna Cadorna, Patrick Nyikavaranda, Lucy Maconick, Brynmor Lloyd-Evans, Sonia Johnson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

6 authors.

Heather StaplesDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, Maple House, 149 Tottenham Ct Rd, W1T 7BN, London, UK.
Gianna CadornaDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, Maple House, 149 Tottenham Ct Rd, W1T 7BN, London, UK.
Patrick NyikavarandaNIHR Policy Research Unit in Mental Health, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Lucy MaconickDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, Maple House, 149 Tottenham Ct Rd, W1T 7BN, London, UK.
Brynmor Lloyd-EvansNIHR Policy Research Unit in Mental Health, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Sonia JohnsonDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, Maple House, 149 Tottenham Ct Rd, W1T 7BN, London, UK. s.johnson@ucl.ac.uk.

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research PR-PRU-0916-22003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCrisis cafés (also known as crisis sanctuaries or havens) are community-based services which support people in mental health crises, aiming to provide an informal, non-clinical and accessible setting. This model is increasingly popular in the UK; however, we are aware of no peer-reviewed literature focused on this model. We aimed to investigate the aims of crisis cafés, how they operate in practice and the factors that affect access to these services and implementation of the intended model.

methodsA qualitative approach was used. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 managers of crisis cafés across England. These interviews explored managers' views on the implementation of their services, and the factors that help and hinder successful implementation. Data were analysed using Braun and Clarke's reflexive thematic approach.

resultsWe identified five main perceived aims for crisis cafés: providing an alternative to Emergency Departments; improving access to crisis care; providing people in acute distress with someone to talk to in a safe and comfortable space; triaging effectively; and improving crisis planning and people's coping skills. Factors seen as influencing the effectiveness of crisis cafés included accessibility, being able to deliver person-centred care, relationships with other services, and staffing. These factors could both help and hinder access to care and the implementation of the intended model. There were a number of trade-offs that services had to consider when designing and running a crisis café: (1) Balancing an open-door policy with managing demand for the service through referral routes, (2) Balancing risk management procedures with the remit of offering a non-clinical environment and (3) Increasing awareness of the service in the community whilst avoiding stigmatising perceptions of it.

conclusionsFindings illustrate the aims of the crisis café model of care and factors which are influential in its implementation in current practice. Future research is needed to evaluate the efficacy of these services in relation to their aims. Crisis café service users' views, and views of stakeholders from the wider crisis care system should also be ascertained.

Indexed as

Health Services AccessibilityInterviews as TopicQualitative ResearchCommunity Mental Health ServicesCrisis InterventionEnglandHumansMental DisordersCrisis caféMental health crisisMental health servicesQualitative researchService evaluation

Identifiers

PMID39478622
PMCPMC11526642

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.