↓ Skip to main content

Enabling people, not completing tasks: patient perspectives on relationships and staff morale in mental health wards in England

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
30 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
130 Mendeley
Title
Enabling people, not completing tasks: patient perspectives on relationships and staff morale in mental health wards in England
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12888-015-0690-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Himanshu Mistry, William M. M. Levack, Sonia Johnson

Abstract

Mental health inpatient wards are stressful places to work and concerns have been raised regarding quality of patient care and staff wellbeing on these wards. Recent research has suggested that robust support systems and conditions that allow staff to exercise professional autonomy in their clinical work result in better staff morale. Staff value having a voice in their organisations, and say that they would like more interaction with patients and processes to reduce violent incidents on wards. There has been little research into patients' views on staff morale and on how it may impact on their care. This study aimed to explore staff morale and staff-patient relationships from a patient perspective. A qualitative investigation was conducted using purposive sampling to select seven inpatient wards in England representing various subspecialties. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with three patients on each ward. A thematic approach to analysis was used, supported by NVivo 10 software. Patients valued staff who worked together as a cohesive team, treated them as individuals, practised in a collaborative way and used enabling approaches to support their recovery. Participating patients described observing staff closely and feeling concerned at times about their well-being and the impact on them of stress and adverse incidents. They tended to perceive ward staff and patients as closely and reciprocally linked, with staff morale having a significant impact on patient well-being and vice versa. Some participants also described modifying their own behaviour because of concerns about staff well-being. Administrative duties, staff shortages and detrimental effects of violent incidents on the ward were seen as compromising staff members' ability to be involved with patients' lives and care. Patient views about the factors impacting on staff morale on inpatient wards are similar to those of staff in qualitative studies. Their accounts suggest that staff and patient morale should be seen as interlinked, suggesting there is scope for interventions to benefit both.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 129 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 15%
Researcher 18 14%
Student > Bachelor 14 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 8%
Other 14 11%
Unknown 32 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 22 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 14%
Social Sciences 7 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 3%
Other 18 14%
Unknown 40 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 December 2016.
All research outputs
#2,089,733
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#758
of 5,507 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,639
of 397,321 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#9
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,507 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 397,321 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.