ArticleBMJ open quality2025
Article in BMJ open quality, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundViolence and aggression (V&A) are commonplace on mental-health wards and may lead to restrictive practice interventions (RPI), having a detrimental impact on patients and staff. In the 12 months preceding this quality improvement (QI) project, there was a mean V&A incidence of 52.7±113.0 and RPI of 37.6±84.1 per 1000 bed days.
methodsUsing QI methodology, a project involving creative practitioners was codeveloped to provide a range of activities delivered via a 7-day service, across 13 inpatient mental-health wards in five hospital settings, using levels of V&A and RPI as outcome measures. The creative practices used drew on successful projects arising from a linked charity, Creative Minds. Three plan-do-study-act cycles were completed. (1) Coproduction with ward staff, patients and creative practitioners of 4-week session plans, including an induction training package for creative practitioners. (2) Streamlined and centralised communication between creative practitioners and participating wards using a project coordinator. (3) Implementation of a creative-practitioner Rota to better support ward activity planning, staff and patient expectation setting.
resultsDuring the 12-month project wards with creative practitioners experienced statistically significant reduction in V&A levels (F (1, 168)=5.72, p=0.017) and RPI (F (1, 168)=8.40, p=0.0042). Wards not involved in the project, V&A levels (F (1, 142) =3.34, p<0.069) and RPI (F (132, 142)=0.99, p=0.52) remained unchanged. Ward length-of-stay was used as a balancing measure with no difference pre 45.0±4.9 days and post 46.9±5.0 days intervention (p=0.18). At the project peak, creative practitioners delivered around 300 hours per week of creative activity, which appears to be associated with reduced number of V&A/RPI incidents.
conclusionsRecommendations for the project's next steps are to secure sustained funding for creative practitioners to further enhance patients/staff well-being, as well as the coproduction of a creative-practitioner implementation guide to be tested in other mental-health inpatient settings as a part of a research study to better understand the impact of the type/timing of activities (ie, day/evening/weekends) on important patient outcomes and staff well-being.
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.