ArticleInternational journal of mental health nursing2025
A Realist-Informed Evaluation of a Rapid Response System for Mental State Deterioration in Acute Hospitals: Testing Program Theories Through Interviews.
Article in International journal of mental health nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- How shared-site intergenerational programs support psychosocial well-being in residential aged care: a realist evaluation.The Gerontologist · 2026Article
- A Realist Evaluation of a Rapid Response System for Mental State Deterioration in Acute Hospital Settings.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- A Realist-Informed Evaluation of a Rapid Response System for Mental State Deterioration in Acute Hospitals: Testing Program Theories Through Interviews.International journal of mental health nursing · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Effective management of patient mental state deterioration in acute hospital settings is crucial due to its significant impact on both patients and staff. However, inconsistencies in management strategies highlight the need for standardised approaches. We adopted a realist evaluation approach to gain insights into staff perceptions and experiences, exploring how, for whom and under what circumstances the DIvERT (De-escalation, Intervention, Early, Response, Team) system, a rapid response system functions in practice. We conducted 23 semi-structured interviews with clinical staff from two pilot acute hospital settings. The qualitative data were analysed to identify key themes and contextual factors that influence the system's functioning, providing insights into the mechanisms through which DIvERT facilitates proactive intervention. Findings indicated that ward staff valued a structured approach and benefited from interdisciplinary collaboration with mental health experts, which improved their clinical knowledge and confidence. A supportive ward culture, characterised by teamwork and open communication, facilitated collaboration and response effectiveness. However, bedside nurses often deferred escalation decisions to senior staff, have to balance prioritising immediate medical needs over proactive risk management. Inconsistent training, unclear escalation pathways and knowledge gaps, particularly among new graduates, limited system efficiency. Resource shortages and scheduling conflicts further constrained timely responses. Addressing these barriers through structured training, clear escalation pathways and proactive risk management is essential to improving mental state deterioration management. A ward culture that promotes communication, teamwork and effective resource allocation can strengthen the implementation and effectiveness of rapid response systems in acute hospital settings.
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.