Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorTyler, Natasha; orcid: 0000-0001-8257-1090; email: natasha.tyler@manchester.ac.uk
dc.contributor.authorWright, Nicola
dc.contributor.authorPanagioti, Maria; orcid: 0000-0002-7153-5745
dc.contributor.authorGrundy, Andrew
dc.contributor.authorWaring, Justin
dc.date.accessioned2021-05-21T04:17:52Z
dc.date.available2021-05-21T04:17:52Z
dc.date.issued2021-01-20
dc.date.submitted2020-04-03
dc.identifierhttps://chesterrep.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10034/624655/hex.13190.pdf?sequence=2
dc.identifierhttps://chesterrep.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10034/624655/hex.13190.xml?sequence=3
dc.identifier.citationHealth Expectations, volume 24, page 185-194
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10034/624655
dc.descriptionFrom Wiley via Jisc Publications Router
dc.descriptionHistory: received 2020-04-03, rev-recd 2020-11-30, accepted 2020-12-14, pub-electronic 2021-01-20, pub-print 2021-05
dc.descriptionArticle version: VoR
dc.descriptionPublication status: Published
dc.descriptionFunder: NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre; Id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013235
dc.description.abstractAbstract: Background: Historically, safety mental health research has tended to focus on risks of homicide, suicide and deaths. Although wider safety issues are now recognized in regards to mental health services, the safety of mental health transitions, a key research and policy priority according to World Health Organisation, has not been explored. Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate perceptions of safety in mental health transitions (hospital to community) amongst five stakeholder groups. Design and setting: An online, international cross‐sectional, open‐ended questionnaire. Participants: There were five stakeholder participant groups: service users; families/carers; mental health‐care professionals; researchers; and end users of research. Results: Ninety‐three participants from 12 different countries responded. Three overarching themes emerged: ‘individual/clinical’, ‘systems/services’ and ‘human, behavioural and social’ elements of safe mental health transitions. Whilst there was a great focus on clinical elements from researchers and healthcare professionals, service users and carers considered safety in terms of human, behavioural and social elements of transitional safety (ie loneliness, emotional readiness for discharge) and systems/services (ie inter‐professional communication). Discussion: Safety in mental health‐care transitions is perceived differently by service users and families compared to healthcare professionals and researchers. Traditional safety indicators for care transitions such as suicide, self‐harm and risk of adverse drug events are raised as important. However, service users and families in particular have a much wider perception of transitions safety. Conclusion: Future quality and safety research and policy should consider including a service user voice and consider integration of psychosocial elements in discharge interventions.
dc.languageen
dc.rightsLicence for VoR version of this article: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.sourceissn: 1369-6513
dc.sourceissn: 1369-7625
dc.subjectSPECIAL ISSUE PAPER
dc.subjectSPECIAL ISSUE ON MENTAL HEALTH
dc.subjectcare transitions
dc.subjectdischarge
dc.subjectmental health
dc.subjectpatient safety
dc.subjectsafety
dc.subjectthematic analysis
dc.titleWhat does safety in mental healthcare transitions mean for service users and other stakeholder groups: An open‐ended questionnaire study
dc.typearticle
dc.date.updated2021-05-21T04:17:52Z
dc.date.accepted2020-12-14


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
hex.13190.pdf
Size:
336.7Kb
Format:
PDF
Thumbnail
Name:
hex.13190.xml
Size:
10.27Kb
Format:
XML

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record