BackgroundAggressive situations occurring within mental health services can harm service users, staff, and the therapeutic environment. There is a consensus that the aggression phenomenon is multidimensional, but the picture is still unclear concerning the complex interplay of causal variables and their respective impact. To date, only a small number of empirical studies include users’ views of relevant factors. The main objective of this review is to identify and synthesize evidence relating to service users’ experiences and views of aggressive situations in mental health settings.MethodsWe included qualitative studies of any design reporting on service users’ own experiences of conditions contributing to aggressive situations in mental health care and their views on preventative strategies. Eligible articles were identified through an electronic database search (PsycINFO, PubMed, Ovid Nursing Database, Embase, and CINAHL), hand search, and cross-referencing. Extracted data were combined and interpreted using aspects of thematic synthesis.ResultsWe reviewed 5,566 records and included 13 studies (ten qualitative and three mixed methods). Service users recognized that both their own mental state and negative aspects of the treatment environment affected the development of aggressive situations. Themes were derived from experiential knowledge and included calls to be involved in questions regarding how to define aggression and relevant triggers, and how to prevent aggressive encounters effectively. The findings suggest that incidents are triggered when users experience staff behavior as custodial rather than caring and when they feel ignored.ConclusionThe findings highlight the importance of staffs’ knowledge and skills in communication for developing relationships based on sensitivity, respect, and collaboration with service users in order to prevent aggressive situations. An important factor is a treatment environment with opportunities for meaningful activities and a preponderance of trained staff who work continuously on the development of conditions and skills for collaborative interaction with users.

BackgroundSeveral community mental health centres and mental hospitals in Norway now allow users with a diagnosis of severe mental illness to self-refer for admission. This give a group of service users who are well-known to service providers the opportunity to refer themselves for short inpatient stays without contacting their doctor, a duty doctor or emergency department. Evidence on self-referral admissions is lacking.AimTo explore service users’ experiences of having the opportunity to refer themselves for a short inpatient stay.MethodsForty-two qualitative semi-structured interviews were undertaken between 2010 and 2014 in a group of 28 service users with serious mental illness and with or without substance abuse problems. All respondents had a contract which allowed them to self-refer for inpatient treatment. Systematic text condensation was applied in the analyses.ResultsSelf-referral inpatient admission is more than just a bed. It was perceived as a new, unconventional health service, which differed substantially from earlier experiences of inpatient care and was characterised by different values and treatment principles. The differences were related to the content, quality and organisation of treatment. Having the option to decide about admission for oneself and having access to services focusing on individual needs seem to enhance service users’ confidence, both in the services they use and in their own ability to cope with everyday life.ConclusionsSelf-referral inpatient admission is a concrete example of how a user involvement policy can be implemented in mental health services. It is important to emphasise that the self-referral admission process described here is an offer in development and that we are awaiting findings from a larger RCT study. More evidence is needed to determine what aspects of the service are helpful to service users, the long-term effects, appropriateness and cost-effectiveness, and how the service can be integrated into the mental health system.

The aims of the study were twofold. First, the study examined the extent to which there are gender differences in the experience of caring in a sample of relatives of patients with serious mental illness. Secondly, the study examined the association of self-reports of health and functioning with the experience of burden among relatives of patients with serious mental illness. A total of 50 relatives of 32 patients receiving psychiatric treatment for their bipolar or psychotic condition completed the Experience of Caregiving Inventory (ECI) and COOP-WONCA (a self-report measure of general state of health and functioning). The study revealed that female relatives had a higher score on eight of 10 ECI subscores, and in both ECI negative and ECI positive. Additionally, the study revealed significant correlations between a higher score on the COOP-WONCA feeling subscore and the following ECI subscores: stigma (r = 0.304, p < 0.05), problem with services (r = 0.348, p < 0.05), need to back up (r = 0.335, p < 0.05), loss (r = 0.293, p < 0.05) and the total ECI negative subscore (r = 0.343, p < 0.05). We also found a significant correlation between a higher score on the overall health subscore (COOP-WONCA) and a higher score on problems with services (r = 0.290, p < 0.05). Gender was the strongest predictor of the ECI negative subscore. Neither the COOP-WONCA subscore physical health, daily activities or social activities correlated significantly with any of the ECI subscores. Our results showed strong associations between poor mental well-being and caregiver burden. We also found a higher association with gender and the feelings subscore (COOP-WONCA) on ECI negative than we had expected.

Aims: To examine the experiences of and preferences for helpful care in situations of mental crisis from the perspective of people with major mental disorders. Methods: Qualitative individual interviews with 19 users with major mental disorder, 13 men and six women, aged 22-60 years. Analysis was conducted with systematic text condensation. Results: The main tendencies among a majority of the users are a clear understanding of their own problems and ways of handling these, and the desire for early help from providers whom they know well and who are open to dialogue and reflection. A clear majority perceived a high threshold for contacting the mental health system due to negative experiences and lack of user involvement in treatment planning and implementation. Conclusion: The findings challenge traditional views of professionalism and describe important implications for mental health services from the user's perspective. Our study provides a clear indication of the importance of becoming an active participant in one's own life, and the need for deeper understanding among the professionals in relation to user experiences and preferences for helpful care in periods of mental health crisis in order to optimize the care.

Background In March 2020, the Norwegian government announced a COVID-19 lockdown in order to reduce the spread of the coronavirus. In Norway, lockdown measures included restricting people’s ability to leave their home and the closing of social institutions, thus reducing the capacity for victims of intimate partner violence to alert someone outside of their home about violent incidents that occurred during lockdown. At the same time, the restrictive measures forced the victim and the perpetrator to stay together for prolonged periods within the home, and reduced the possibility for them to escape or leave the perpetrator. The aim of this study was to investigate how the frequency and character of intimate partner violence reported to the police changed during the period of lockdown in Norway. Methods All cases of intimate partner violence registered in police files before the pandemic (from January 2016-February 2020) and during lockdown in Norway (March-December 2020) were included in the study, representing a total of 974 cases. Differences in the number and severity of cases were calculated using χ2-tests and Wilcoxon’s rank sum test. Differences in the characteristics of the reported violence was assessed with the Brief Spousal Assault form for the Evaluation of Risk (B-SAFER) and tested with Fischer’s exact test with Bonferroni correction. Standardised Morbidity Rate (SMR) statistics were used to analyse the proportion of immigrants as compared to the general population. Results Reported intimate partner violence increased by 54% during the lockdown period in Norway. Between March-December 2020, the police assessed the cases as being at higher risk of imminent and severe violence. Our findings indicated an overrepresentation of immigrant perpetrators before and during lockdown (SMR = 1.814, 95% CI = 1.792–1.836 before, and SMR = 1.807, 95% CI = 1.742–1.872 during lockdown). Notably, while victims with an immigrant background were overrepresented before lockdown, we found significantly lower proportion of immigrant IPV victims during the lockdown period (SMR = 1.070, 95% CI = 1.052–1.087 before, and SMR = 0.835, CI 95% CI = 0.787-0.883 during lockdown). Also, there were significantly more female perpetrators and male victims reported to the police during the lockdown period. A higher proportion of the victims were assessed as having unsafe living conditions and personal problems during lockdown. Finally, during the lockdown period in Norway, a higher proportion of perpetrators had a history of intimate relationship problems. Conclusions Intimate partner violence increased dramatically during the COVID-19 lockdown. A range of options for victims to escape from their perpetrators, particularly during times of crisis, should be developed in line with good practice, and with a special focus on the most vulnerable victims.