ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Barriers to the implementation of psychosocial interventions on acute mental health wards: an ethnographic observational study.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: It is notoriously challenging to deliver psychosocial interventions on acute mental health wards. This paper presents an ethnographic observational study which captured how ward and staff processes impacted on the delivery of a psychosocial intervention called TULIPS (Talk, Understand and Listen for Inpatient Settings). Although the paper is focused on one specific intervention, the findings have implications for the delivery of other psychosocial interventions within acute mental health settings. Method: We carried out participant observation across 6 case studies wards all participating in the intervention arm of a cluster randomised controlled trial evaluating the TULIPS intervention compared to treatment as usual. Trained researchers observed ward environments, activities and social interactions taking detailed field notes which were later subject to thematic analysis. Results: Four themes were generated from field notes relating to aspects of the ward culture and staff behaviours which were barriers or facilitators to the delivery of the TULIPS intervention. Theme one highlighted how the person-centred nature of the TULIPS model was at odds with the pre-existing culture of the wards which favoured blanket rules. Theme two highlighted how staff prioritised task-oriented quantifiable activities which clashed with the emphasis the TULIPS model placed on relationship building. The third theme highlighted the presence of conflict between different groups of staff working on the ward and theme four highlighted the stressful nature of the ward environment which drove staff to seek refuge from patient facing activities including TULIPS related activities. Conclusions: In order to successfully engage with the delivery of psychosocial interventions on acute mental health wards, staff need access to supportive leadership which champions psychological interventions, as well as training, supervision and support systems which value the demanding nature of working on mental health inpatient wards.
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.