This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

ObjectivesPatients in inpatient mental health settings face similar risks (eg, medication errors) to those in other areas of healthcare. In addition, some unsafe behaviours associated with serious mental health problems (eg, self-harm), and the measures taken to address these (eg, restraint), may result in further risks to patient safety. The objective of this review is to identify and synthesise the literature on patient safety within inpatient mental health settings using robust systematic methodology.DesignSystematic review and meta-synthesis. Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Health Management Information Consortium, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science were systematically searched from 1999 to 2019. Search terms were related to ‘mental health’, ‘patient safety’, ‘inpatient setting’ and ‘research’. Study quality was assessed using the Hawker checklist. Data were extracted and grouped based on study focus and outcome. Safety incidents were meta-analysed where possible using a random-effects model.ResultsOf the 57 637 article titles and abstracts, 364 met inclusion criteria. Included publications came from 31 countries and included data from over 150 000 participants. Study quality varied and statistical heterogeneity was high. Ten research categories were identified: interpersonal violence, coercive interventions, safety culture, harm to self, safety of the physical environment, medication safety, unauthorised leave, clinical decision making, falls and infection prevention and control.ConclusionsPatient safety in inpatient mental health settings is under-researched in comparison to other non-mental health inpatient settings. Findings demonstrate that inpatient mental health settings pose unique challenges for patient safety, which require investment in research, policy development, and translation into clinical practice.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42016034057.

BackgroundTechnological interventions may help support and improve mental health. However young peoples’ perspectives on using different technologies to detect deteriorating mental health in those already diagnosed with a mental health condition is lacking. The study aim was to explore the perspectives of young patients on the feasibility and acceptability of using wearables, social media and technologies to detect mental health deterioration.MethodsThe study was co-produced with young adults with past mental health difficulties. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with young adults with a severe mental health condition in a private room at a community mental health site. Data was triangulated by comparing codes and ideas across the two co-researchers and two researchers over two virtual meetings. Themes were finalised and presented in a thematic map.ResultsSixteen participants were interviewed (81% female). There were four main themes: dealing with mental health symptoms, signs of mental health deterioration, technology concerns and technological applications to identify worsening mental health. Wearables and mobile apps were considered acceptable and feasible to detect mental health deterioration in real-time if they could measure changes in sleep patterns, mood or activity levels as signs of deterioration. Getting help earlier was deemed essential particularly in reference to dissatisfaction with the current non-technological mental health services. However, patients identified issues to consider before implementation including practicality, safeguarding and patient preference.ConclusionWearables and mobile apps could be viable technological options to help detect deterioration in young people in order to intervene early and avoid delay in accessing mental health services. However, immediate action following detection is required for the patient to trust and use the intervention.

No abstract

No abstract

ObjectiveTo investigate the prevalence of insomnia and identify associated demographic, clinical and forensic risk factors in adult prisoners in England.MethodsA cross-sectional study of 237 prisoners aged 18–72 years, across two male prisons and one female prison in North England. We used the Sleep Condition Indicator to measure probable DSM-V insomnia disorder (ID) and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index to examine sleep quality. Multiple demographic, sleep, clinical and forensic self-reported measures were recorded to identify any associations with insomnia.ResultsOverall, the prevalence of possible DSM-V ID was 61.6% (95% CI, 55.5%–67.8%). Subjective poor sleep quality was reported by 88.2% (95% CI, 84.1%–92.3%). Seven in ten (70.6%) female prisoners had possible DSM-V ID (95% CI, 64.8%–76.4%). Multivariable logistic regression analysis, adjusting for gender and age, indicated odds of having possible ID in prison were increased for the following factors: history of physical ill-health (OR = 3.62, 95% CI, 1.31–9.98); suicidality (OR = 2.79, 95% CI, 1.01.7.66), previously asked for help for insomnia (OR = 2.58, 95% CI, 1.21–5.47), depression (OR = 2.06, 95% CI 1.31–3.24), greater endorsement of dysfunctional beliefs about sleep (OR = 1.50, 95% CI, 1.21–1.87), poor sleep hygiene (OR = 1.11, 95% CI, 1.04–1.19), and problematic prison environment (eg, noise, light or temperature) (OR = 1.07, 95% CI, 1.02–1.12).ConclusionsFor the first time we have established the prevalence and associated factors of insomnia in a large sample of adult English prisoners. ID and poor sleep quality are common, especially in female prisoners. These findings emphasize/amplify the need for dedicated treatment pathways to improve screening, assessment and treatment of insomnia in prison.

ObjectivePhysical healthcare has dominated the patient safety field; research in mental healthcare is not as extensive but findings from physical healthcare cannot be applied to mental healthcare because it delivers specialised care that faces unique challenges. Therefore, a clearer focus and recognition of patient safety in mental health as a distinct research area is still needed. The study aim is to identify future research priorities in the field of patient safety in mental health.DesignSemistructured interviews were conducted with the experts to ascertain their views on research priorities in patient safety in mental health. A three-round online Delphi study was used to ascertain consensus on 117 research priority statements.Setting and participantsAcademic and service user experts from the USA, UK, Switzerland, Netherlands, Ireland, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Sweden, Australia, New Zealand and Singapore were included.Main outcome measuresAgreement in research priorities on a five-point scale.ResultsSeventy-nine statements achieved consensus (>70%). Three out of the top six research priorities were patient driven; experts agreed that understanding the patient perspective on safety planning, on self-harm and on medication was important.ConclusionsThis is the first international Delphi study to identify research priorities in safety in the mental field as determined by expert academic and service user perspectives. A reasonable consensus was obtained from international perspectives on future research priorities in patient safety in mental health; however, the patient perspective on their mental healthcare is a priority. The research agenda for patient safety in mental health identified here should be informed by patient safety science more broadly and used to further establish this area as a priority in its own right. The safety of mental health patients must have parity with that of physical health patients to achieve this.

Findings suggest that alternative models of prison mental healthcare should be considered to reduce risks to the patient and the public.