|
|
|||||||||||

Royal College of Psychiatrists' Centre for Quality Improvement, College Research and Training Unit, 4th Floor, Standon House, 21 Mansell Street, London E1 8AA, email: plelliott{at}cru.rcpsych.ac.uk
Department of Health
This is one of a series of papers on acute in-patient services. ![]()
|
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
Problems for acute mental health in-patient units and their causes |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Unsafe environments
The Healthcare Commission's National Audit of Violence reported
that the design of many wards failed to meet basic safety standards
(Healthcare Commission, 2005).
There were particular problems with poor visibility associated with obstructed
sight-lines. Many wards also had inadequate alarm systems. This finding was
consistent with NIMHE's survey where over one-third of ward managers described
significant reported, but unresolved, environmental risks. In relation to the
impact of environmental risk: in the Healthcare Commission's audit, 36% of
service users and 78% of nursing staff said that they had experienced violence
on the ward that was being studied; Mind's study
(Mind, 2004) reported that 27%
of respondents rarely felt safe while in hospital, and over 50% had
experienced verbal and physical threat during their stay.
Inadequate staffing
The NIMHE survey found that in England 13% of posts for qualified staff
were unfilled (in London this figure was 22%). In addition, a national
sickness figure of 6.8% was reported. Many participants of the national audit
stated that there was an ongoing drain of experienced staff into higher paid,
and often more highly regarded, posts in community services. The NIMHE survey
confirmed this, revealing that 26% of participating wards had lost staff to
community teams in the previous year. The national audit highlighted two
particular adverse consequences of the loss of staff. First, that many
in-patient services were left reliant upon inexperienced leaders: this was
confirmed by NIMHE's survey, which showed that 13% of acute wards lacked a
manager or nurse above an F grade at the time of the survey. Second, wards
were over-reliant on the expensive and less-than-ideal option of using bank
and agency staff: at the time of NIMHE's survey, the national average usage of
bank and agency staff was 152 h per week (equivalent to 4 whole-time staff on
each ward).
Client mix and overcrowding
The national audit reported that many acute mental health services were
fire-fighting as they struggled to work with an increasingly
unwell population; there was also evidence of inappropriate use of beds. The
NIMHE survey found that 4.2% of acute beds were being used solely for the
purposes of detoxification. Respondents in the Healthcare Commission's audit
made an explicit link between the high prevalence of substance misuse among
in-patients and violence; 74% of nurses from acute wards thought that alcohol
caused trouble on the ward, and 81% thought that this was true for illegal
drugs.
High levels of boredom
The national audit revealed that many wards were unable to offer service
users a structured and therapeutic regimen of care: 35% of service users
reported dissatisfaction with the choice of activities available during the
day; this figure increased to 48% during the evening and 52% at weekends. The
NIMHE survey found that little more than one-third of wards were able to offer
psychosocial interventions, despite the evidence base to support their use;
cognitive-behavioural therapy was available on fewer than 20% of wards. As
well as the obvious link between boredom and
violence, this was seen to have an impact on recovery rates for
service users. More than 50% of respondents in Mind's study thought that their
hospital surroundings had not helped their recovery; 31% stated that it had
made their health worse.
|
|
Staff training in the prevention and management of violence |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
National and local responses to the problems for acute wards |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In England, Anna Walker, Chief Executive of the Healthcare Commission, responded to the report of the audit by saying:
This audit gives us hard evidence on an area of growing concern. It suggests that while community services have been really important, more attention must be given to in-patients. Nobody must take their eye off this ball . . . We will build on the findings of this report by refining the way we assess the performance of mental health units. There is plenty of good work going on. We've got to ensure best practice becomes standard practice.
The Healthcare Commission has since articulated this commitment in two ways: first, the 2006/2007 improvement review for mental health is focusing on acute services with an emphasis on the ward; second, a further phase of the National Audit of Violence has been funded for 2006/2007. The Healthcare Commission anticipates that the audit will involve all English and Welsh providers of mental health in-patient services, both in the National Health Service (NHS) and independent sector. The audit will include admission wards for older people, as well as acute wards for adults of working age.
The NIMHE has been leading a broad range of national, regional and locally targeted interventions. At a national level, a cross-government management of violence project was set up to take forward specific targeted pieces of work, including the establishment of a system for accrediting and regulating training in the prevention and management of violence, and the revision of the Department of Health estates guidance relating to ward design; a project board and subgroups were established to take forward various strands of work, including the development of a handbook of standards to support the Healthcare Commission's forthcoming round of acute services improvement reviews. Regionally, practice development networks and/or collaboratives were set up for acute and psychiatric intensive care units. Locally, every provider trust was asked to establish an acute care forum with guidance and direction coming from a lead at the NIMHE Regional Development Centre.
The Chief Nursing Officer's Review of Mental Health Nursing was published in April 2006. Its recommendations aim to improve care and treatment in acute settings through innovations such as increasing the amount of time nurses spend in direct care contact, through schemes such as protected time initiatives, reviewing career pathways for in-patient staff and developing the leadership skills of ward managers. Linked to this, NIMHE will be leading on two initiatives: issuing guidance on the management of substance misuse on in-patient wards; and developing guidance on different approaches and innovative practice for skill mix and staffing levels in acute care which take account of new roles and ways of working.
The NHS Counter Fraud and Security Management Service is taking forward a number of initiatives aimed at tackling violence towards staff: a national physical assault reporting system; conflict resolution training for all frontline staff; a legal protection unit offering advice and support in respect of taking action against those who assault staff; and the requirement for each health body to nominate an executive director at board level charged with taking responsibility for security management, and a local security management specialist to undertake work at a local level.
The National Patient Safety Agency (NPSA) is leading a project to improve the safety of mental health service users by creating a safer environment on acute psychiatric wards (Marshall et al, 2004). The issue was identified as a priority for action when a breakdown of data from the pilot phase of the NPSA's national reporting and learning system showed a high number of mental health patient safety incidents related to in-patient wards.
The professional bodies have also been active in this area. In particular, the Royal College of Psychiatrists, in partnership with the British Psychological Society, the College of Occupational Therapists and the Royal College of Nursing have established an accreditation system for acute psychiatric wards (Lelliott et al, 2006).
All of these initiatives, however, will only be successful if trusts are able to embrace them at ward level. A recent follow-up study by the Healthcare Commission of the wards that completed the audit of violence offers considerable hope that this will happen (Healthcare Commission, 2006). Between September and December 2005, action plans and progress reports were called for from all the trusts that took part in the audit. A sample of 14 trusts were then visited or spoken to about the improvements that they had been able to bring about following on from the audit and its findings. The study indicated that the audit was perceived to be a success by staff working on the participating wards, in clinical leadership roles, and in clinical governance departments. For some, their successes were relatively simple, for example, moving public telephones to more private areas, the introduction of routine incident debriefing, and increasing service user involvement in ward decision-making. Others had engaged in complex, time-consuming and sometimes costly ventures such as relocating smoking facilities, installing electronically controlled blinds to assist temperature control, working with local police to minimise substance misuse or purchasing new alarm systems. Based upon a large number of interviews with staff of all grades and professional background and services users, the follow-up survey concluded that in all situations where the therapeutic environment was improved, levels of aggression had diminished. A number of key factors were highlighted:
Staff were seen to grow in confidence within their interactions with patients and were willing to try new approaches if backed up by evidence. Junior staff particularly felt senior management and the boards were willing to listen . . . Patients felt their opinions counted especially when their views were used in planning activities and in debriefing sessions . . . Some [patients] now felt that staff dealt with issues in a more caring, confident and containing manner. (Healthcare Commission, 2006)
|
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
GARCIA, I., KENNETT, C., QURAISHI, M., et al (2005) Acute Care 2004: A National Survey of Adult Psychiatric Wards in England. Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health.
HEALTHCARE COMMISSION (2005) National Audit of Violence (2003-2005). Healthcare Commission.
HEALTHCARE COMMISSION (2006) National Audit of Violence Action Plan Follow-up. Healthcare Commission.
LELLIOTT, P., BENNETT, H., McGEORGE, M., et al
(2006) Accreditation of acute in-patient mental health services.
Psychiatric Bulletin,
30, 361
-363.
MARSHALL, H., LELLIOTT, P. & HILL, K. (2004) Safer Wards for Acute Psychiatry. A Review of the Available Evidence. National Patient Safety Agency. http://www.npsa.nhs.uk/site/media/documents/1241_SWAP_ResearchReport.pdf
MIND (2004) Ward Watch: Mind's Campaign to Improve Hospital Conditions for Mental Health Patients. Mind.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| British Journal of Psychiatry | Advances in Psychiatric Treatment | All RCPsych Journals |