A preliminary comparison of acute mental health inpatient wards which use Protected Engagement Time, with other wards delivering standard care alone

F. Nolan, S. Johnson, B. Lloyd-Evans, A. Simpson, R. Gray, N. Morant, H. Gilburt, C. Kirton

Research output: Contribution to journalMeeting abstract

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Patients on acute psychiatric wards in the UK have recurrently reported that they are unhappy with the ward environment, that they are bored and have little to do, that wards are intimidating, and above all, contact between staff and patients is often identified as too limited in both quantity and quality, and as lacking therapeutic content. Despite various local and national initiatives, we do not yet have an evidence-based way of addressing this problem. Protected Engagement Time (PET) has emerged as a promising initiative for improving quantity and usefulness of staff-patient contact. During fixed periods of the day, staffs are asked to focus solely on patient contact: visitors are not admitted and administrative duties and meetings not allowed. This approach is popular and inexpensive to implement. However, we do not have any evidence about whether it works or how it should be implemented to achieve the best results. This pilot study aims to address the lack of evidence around the PET initiative. Our primary objectives are to identify whether it works, what the principal components are, and in what way these might be combined in order to maximise impact. The findings of this pilot study will also provide a basis for a future randomised trial of the intervention.

Methods: The study has three Modules: Module (1) A national telephone survey of all acute wards in England investigating how widespread PET now is, and how it has been implemented. (2) Evaluation of the effects of PET on patients and staff by comparing 12 wards with PET and 12 wards without, across three mental health sites. Two of these sites are in London and one is in Norfolk. The study will observe whether there is more contact between staff and patients with PET, and will use questionnaires and interviews to compare patients’ satisfaction with care and staff burnout on wards with and without PET. It will also examine the frequency of conflict between staff and patients and both groups’ perceptions of the ward environment. We aim to include a minimum of 300 staff and 300 patients throughout the 24 wards. (3) In-depth case studies on three wards with PET, using open-ended interviews with patients, staff and service managers, exploring their experiences of the effects of PET and how best to implement it.

Results: The study began in June 2010, and data collection is currently underway for Modules 1 and 2. The results from Module 1 will be presented at this conference, in addition to preliminary findings from Module 2.

Discussion/Conclusions: Initial findings will be discussed.

Funding: £ 250,000 from the NIHR, Research for Patient Benefit Funding stream (RfPB, reference no. PB-PG-0808–17014).
Original languageEnglish
JournalPsychiatrische Praxis
Volume38
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A preliminary comparison of acute mental health inpatient wards which use Protected Engagement Time, with other wards delivering standard care alone'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this