Leave for informally admitted patients: a review of written guidance produced by mental health services in England and Wales

IF 1 Q4 PSYCHIATRY Mental Health Review Journal Pub Date : 2023-12-25 DOI:10.1108/mhrj-03-2023-0013
Russell Ashmore
{"title":"Leave for informally admitted patients: a review of written guidance produced by mental health services in England and Wales","authors":"Russell Ashmore","doi":"10.1108/mhrj-03-2023-0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this paper is to report on the use and content of written guidance produced by mental health services in England and Wales describing hospital leave for informally admitted patients.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nGuidance on leave was requested from National Health Service (NHS) mental health trusts in England and health boards in Wales (n = 61) using a Freedom of Information submission. Data were analysed using content analysis.\n\n\nFindings\nIn total, 32 organisations had a leave policy for informal patients. Policies varied considerably in content and quality. The content of policies was not supported by research evidence. Organisations appeared to have developed their policies by either adapting or copying the guidance on section 17 leave outlined in the Mental Health Act Codes of Practice for England and Wales (Department of Health, 2016; Welsh Government, 2016). Definitions of important terms, for example, leave and hospital premises, were either absent or poorly defined. Finally, some organisations appeared to be operating pseudo-legal coercive contracts to prevent informal patients from leaving hospital wards.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nResearch should be undertaken to explore the impact of local policies on the informal patient’s right to life and liberty.\n\n\nPractical implications\nAll NHS organisations need to develop an evidence-based policy to facilitate the informal patient’s right to take leave. A set of national standards that organisations are required to comply with would help to standardise the content of leave policies.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nTo the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first study to examine the use and content of local policies describing how informal patients can take leave from hospital.\n","PeriodicalId":45687,"journal":{"name":"Mental Health Review Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mental Health Review Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/mhrj-03-2023-0013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to report on the use and content of written guidance produced by mental health services in England and Wales describing hospital leave for informally admitted patients. Design/methodology/approach Guidance on leave was requested from National Health Service (NHS) mental health trusts in England and health boards in Wales (n = 61) using a Freedom of Information submission. Data were analysed using content analysis. Findings In total, 32 organisations had a leave policy for informal patients. Policies varied considerably in content and quality. The content of policies was not supported by research evidence. Organisations appeared to have developed their policies by either adapting or copying the guidance on section 17 leave outlined in the Mental Health Act Codes of Practice for England and Wales (Department of Health, 2016; Welsh Government, 2016). Definitions of important terms, for example, leave and hospital premises, were either absent or poorly defined. Finally, some organisations appeared to be operating pseudo-legal coercive contracts to prevent informal patients from leaving hospital wards. Research limitations/implications Research should be undertaken to explore the impact of local policies on the informal patient’s right to life and liberty. Practical implications All NHS organisations need to develop an evidence-based policy to facilitate the informal patient’s right to take leave. A set of national standards that organisations are required to comply with would help to standardise the content of leave policies. Originality/value To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first study to examine the use and content of local policies describing how informal patients can take leave from hospital.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
非正式入院病人的休假:对英格兰和威尔士精神健康服务机构编制的书面指南的审查
本文旨在报告英格兰和威尔士精神卫生服务机构编制的书面指南的使用情况和内容,这些指南描述了非正式入院患者的医院休假情况。研究结果共有 32 家机构制定了非正式病人休假政策。政策的内容和质量差异很大。政策内容没有得到研究证据的支持。各机构在制定其政策时,似乎都对英格兰和威尔士的《精神健康法案实践守则》(Department of Health, 2016; Welsh Government, 2016)中概述的第 17 条休假指南进行了改编或照搬。一些重要术语的定义,如休假和医院场所等,要么缺失,要么定义不清。最后,一些机构似乎正在实施伪法律强制合同,以阻止非正式患者离开医院病房。研究局限性/影响研究应探讨地方政策对非正式患者生命权和自由权的影响。实际意义所有国民保健服务机构都需要制定以证据为基础的政策,以促进非正式患者的休假权。据作者所知,这是第一份研究报告,研究了描述非正式病人如何从医院请假的地方政策的使用情况和内容。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
32
期刊最新文献
Understanding gender-responsive needs of girls in the Children and Young People Secure Estate (CYPSE): menstrual cycle considerations Editorial: The British and Irish group for the study of personality disorder: reflections on the 23rd annual conference The “Team Tree” Professional Tree of Life intervention: development and evaluation within the acute inpatient psychiatric setting Systematicity of receiving mental health care predicts better subjective well-being of Ukrainians during the second year of the Russian invasion Comparing service user perspectives of an early intervention in psychosis service before and during COVID-19 lockdowns: a service evaluation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1