Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40779779›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025

Patient Perspectives on Open-Door Policies in Psychiatry: Mixed Methods Study.

Timur Liwinski, Robert Davidson, Jan Sarlon, Rainer Gaupp, Lukas Imfeld, Annette B Brühl, Marc Vogel, Christian G Huber, Undine E Lang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Timur Liwinski *Clinic for Adults, Universitäre Psychiatrische Kliniken Basel, Wilhelm-Klein-Strasse 27, Basel, 4002, Switzerland, 41 782050661.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1041-9142
Robert Davidson *Clinic for Adults, Universitäre Psychiatrische Kliniken Basel, Wilhelm-Klein-Strasse 27, Basel, 4002, Switzerland, 41 782050661.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5298-8426
Jan SarlonClinic for Adults, Universitäre Psychiatrische Kliniken Basel, Wilhelm-Klein-Strasse 27, Basel, 4002, Switzerland, 41 782050661.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0818-1830
Rainer GauppClinic for Adults, Universitäre Psychiatrische Kliniken Basel, Wilhelm-Klein-Strasse 27, Basel, 4002, Switzerland, 41 782050661.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2851-0961
Lukas ImfeldClinic for Adults, Universitäre Psychiatrische Kliniken Basel, Wilhelm-Klein-Strasse 27, Basel, 4002, Switzerland, 41 782050661.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1791-9104
Annette B BrühlClinic for Adults, Universitäre Psychiatrische Kliniken Basel, Wilhelm-Klein-Strasse 27, Basel, 4002, Switzerland, 41 782050661.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4704-4986
Marc VogelClinic for Adults, Universitäre Psychiatrische Kliniken Basel, Wilhelm-Klein-Strasse 27, Basel, 4002, Switzerland, 41 782050661.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3088-0331
Christian G Huber *Clinic for Adults, Universitäre Psychiatrische Kliniken Basel, Wilhelm-Klein-Strasse 27, Basel, 4002, Switzerland, 41 782050661.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2246-9008
Undine E Lang *Clinic for Adults, Universitäre Psychiatrische Kliniken Basel, Wilhelm-Klein-Strasse 27, Basel, 4002, Switzerland, 41 782050661.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3585-6533

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Open-door policies in psychiatric wards are increasingly recommended as a means to reduce coercion and enhance patient autonomy. However, evidence that integrates patient perspectives on ward openness and related safety measures remains limited. Traditional qualitative approaches often lack the breadth to fully capture the complexity of these views. We hypothesized that patients would prefer open-door treatment and hold a critical view of locked-ward environments, emphasizing autonomy and dignity in care. Objective: This study aims to systematically explore psychiatric patients' perspectives on open-door versus locked-ward treatment, identifying key themes and quantifying preferences within a large clinical sample. Methods: A hybrid questionnaire survey was conducted in September 2023 at the University Psychiatric Clinics (UPK) Basel. The survey examined psychiatric service usage and integrated key factors from a meta-review, including ward relationships, environment, autonomy, legal status, coercion, care entitlement, and expectations at admission and discharge. The final sample comprised 604 patients (response rate 19.1%) drawn from an initial pool of 3212 former inpatients. A text mining approach using latent Dirichlet allocation, a Bayesian topic modeling technique, was applied to analyze open-ended responses and identify latent thematic structures. Results: The majority of respondents (347/544, 63.8%) rated open-door treatment as "very important" (10 out of 10 on a Likert scale). In contrast, only 21.0% (127/552) of participants were willing to accept voluntary treatment in locked wards, with 70.4% (425/552) explicitly rejecting this option. Logistic regression indicated that younger patients were significantly more likely to accept locked ward treatment (β=-.18, P=.04), while patients diagnosed with mood disorders (ICD-10 [International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision] F3) showed a trend toward lower acceptance (β=-.42, P=.08). Gender and other diagnoses were not significant predictors. Latent Dirichlet allocation identified 5 key topics within patient narratives, which hierarchical clustering grouped into 2 overarching themes: Restriction and Institutionalization, characterized by terms indicating confinement, loss of control, and social isolation; and Autonomy and Self-Determination, which emphasizes patients' desire for freedom, control over daily life, and access to nature and outdoor spaces. Conclusions: This study provides robust evidence that psychiatric patients overwhelmingly prioritize open-door policies, linking them to enhanced autonomy, trust, and therapeutic engagement. The thematic analysis highlights the psychological and social costs of locked wards and the critical need for flexible, patient-centered care models. Younger age and diagnostic category influence willingness to accept locked settings, suggesting the need for tailored approaches. Institutions aiming to implement open-door policies should consider these preferences alongside adequate staffing, therapeutic programming, and environmental modifications to foster autonomy while maintaining safety. Integrating patient perspectives in policy design may enhance treatment satisfaction and clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Hospitals, PsychiatricInpatientsPersonal AutonomyPsychiatryAdolescentAdultAgedBayes TheoremData MiningFacility Design and ConstructionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient SafetyQualitative Researchautonomycoercionopen-door policypatient perspectivespsychiatric caretext miningward environment

Identifiers

PMID40779779
PMCPMC12334140

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.