ReviewJournal of clinical nursing2026
Nurses' Experiences of Mental Health Care in the Emergency Department: An Integrative Review.
Review in Journal of clinical nursing, 2026. 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.
- Effectiveness and Usability of Digital Slow Breathing and Detached Mindfulness Interventions in Late Adolescents: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Nurses' Experiences Caring for People Presenting to the Emergency Department With Mental Health Concerns.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Article
- Caregiver and Care Recipient Perspectives on Paediatric ED Mental Health Presentations: A Qualitative Study.Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo critically synthesise current literature on the nurses' experiences in providing care for people presenting with mental health issues to the emergency department (ED).
backgroundMental health-related presentations to EDs are increasing. Understanding nurses' experiences of providing care for this patient group will inform future strategies to enhance the care delivered in the ED.
methodsCINAHL, MEDLINE, APA PsycInfo and Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection were searched from 2009 to 2024 for peer-reviewed qualitative papers exploring emergency nurses' perspectives of providing care for people with mental health issues, published in the English language. Quality was appraised using the JBI Critical Appraisal tool. This review follows the PRISMA checklist for reporting.
resultsNine papers, reporting eight studies, were included in the review. Three themes emerged: attitudes towards mental illness, education limitations impacting confidence and structural barriers impacting care quality. The review reveals a disconnect between nurses' compassionate intentions and barriers such as unconscious stigma and prioritising physical illness over mental health concerns. The findings highlight the need for targeted mental health education to enhance ED nurses' confidence and competence. Inadequate local mental health policies also impact care delivery, contributing to suboptimal patient outcomes.
conclusionThis review provides a deeper understanding of ED nurses' experiences of caring for people with mental health issues. A need to implement a multifaceted approach to mental health education, clear policies to guide care delivery and systems that promote prioritisation of patients presenting with mental health concerns was identified. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Insights into nurses' experiences can shape future ED practices and enhance outcomes for patients. Building ED nurses' capacity to deliver high-quality mental health care is critical. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONSULTATION: As a review paper, no patient or public consultation took place.
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.