In today’s health care, participation is acknowledged as important. However, there is limited research on how relatives of patients at risk of suicide experience their opportunities to participate in care during periods when their close ones are subject to inpatient care. The aim of this study was to describe the phenomenon of participation, as experienced by relatives of persons who are subject to inpatient psychiatric care due to a risk of suicide. The study was conducted through a reflective lifeworld research (RLR) approach, based on phenomenological philosophy. Eight relatives of patients receiving care from professionals in a psychiatric specialist health care context in Sweden participated in phenomenon-oriented interviews. Data were analysed to elucidate a meaning structure of the phenomenon. The findings show that the phenomenon of participation was more associated with patients’ recovery processes than with the caring process, and means “being actively involved in a process in which the person regains the desire to live”. The meaning of participation is further described by its meaning constituents: struggling for being able to be present for the person at risk of suicide, being able to share everyday life, and nurturing sources for vitality. These insights into the meaning of participation highlight the importance of allowing supportive relatives to be a part of the patient’s life, while the person is cared for in an inpatient hospital setting. Thus, participation enables relatives to be acknowledged as resourceful human beings in the patient’s recovery process, and thereby facilitates a sense of being able to manage and share life itself together with the person. This means that mental health nurses need to recognize individual variations of relatives’ participation processes, and take on the responsibility of acknowledging relatives’ lifeworlds.

Background A major challenge in psychiatric inpatient care is to create an environment that promotes patient recovery, patient safety and good working environment for staff. Since guidelines and programs addressing this issue stress the importance of primary prevention in creating safe environments, more insight is needed regarding patient perceptions of feeling safe. The aim of this study is to enhance our understanding of feelings of being safe or unsafe in psychiatric inpatient care. Methods In this qualitative study, interviews with open-ended questions were conducted with 17 adult patients, five women and 12 men, from four settings: one general psychiatric, one psychiatric addiction and two forensic psychiatric clinics. The main question in the interview guide concerned patients’ feelings of being safe or unsafe. Thematic content analysis with an inductive approach was used to generate codes and, thereafter, themes and subthemes. Results The main results can be summarized in three themes: (1) Predictable and supportive services are necessary for feeling safe. This concerns the ability of psychiatric and social services to meet the needs of patients. Descriptions of delayed care and unpredictable processes were common. The structured environment was mostly perceived as positive. (2) Communication and taking responsibility enhance safety. This is about daily life in the ward, which was often perceived as being socially poor and boring with non-communicative staff. Participants emphasized that patients have to take responsibility for their actions and for co-patients. (3) Powerlessness and unpleasant encounters undermine safety. This addresses the participants’ way of doing risk analyses and handling unpleasant or aggressive patients or staff members. The usual way to act in risk situations was to keep away. Conclusions Our results indicate that creating reliable treatment and care processes, a stimulating social climate in wards, and better staff-patient communication could enhance patient perceptions of feeling safe. It seems to be important that staff provide patients with general information about the safety situation at the ward, without violating individual patients right to confidentiality, and to have an ongoing process that aims to create organizational values promoting safe environments for patients and staff. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13033-019-0282-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The aim of this study was to explore possible regional differences in the use of coercion in psychiatric care as experienced by patients and relatives. At four psychiatric care settings in different parts of Sweden, 138 committed and 144 voluntarily admitted patients were interviewed at admission using the Nordic Admission Interview. At discharge or, if the care episode was still ongoing, after 3 weeks of care, a follow-up patient interview and an interview with 162 relatives of these patients took place. In one of the centers, where involuntarily admitted patients were treated without locking the doors of the wards, the patients reported less coercion at admission than in the other three centers. Regarding the patients' reports of the use of coercive measures, personal treatment and outcome of care, and concerning the relatives' experiences, few differences were found between centers among committed and voluntarily admitted patients, respectively. Coercion in psychiatric care, as reported by patients and relatives, was not always legally based, and many of the patients reported they felt violated during the admission process. Only a minority of patients and relatives reported participation in treatment and care planning, as regulated by law. Still, a majority of both committed and voluntarily admitted patients reported they had been well treated by the personnel at admission as well as during the stay at the ward, and that they had been improved in their mental health after the psychiatric care episode.

Being a close relative, and living together with a severely mentally ill person in an acute situation, is one factor of importance for experiencing burden and participation in care, contradicting the conventional wisdom which differentiates between diagnoses.

The work was carried out at Mälardalen University and the County Hospital Västerås, address as above Author contributions:LS -research planning, contact with clinical setting, data collection, analysis, and manuscript Three meaning constituents emerged: being in an expressive space and giving voice to oneself, regaining dignity through nurturing connectedness, and finding a balance in the tension between life and death. In conclusion, the meaning of recovery is to experience the ability to manage one's own life. Professional caregivers need to acknowledge patients' lifeworlds, in a way that enable patients to experience themselves as capable of managing their own lives. Professional caregivers should also facilitate the involvement of supportive relatives.