The Physical Environment of Purpose-Built and Non-Purpose-Built Supported Housing for Persons with Psychiatric Disabilities in Sweden

Abstract

The primary aim of the present study was to investigate if methods derived from environmental psychology can be used to study the qualities of the physical environment of supported housing facilities for persons with psychiatric disabilities. Three units of analysis were selected: the private area, the common indoor area, and the outdoor area. Expert assessments of 110 features of the physical environment in these units and semantic environmental description of the visual experience of them consistently showed that purpose-built supported housing facilities had more physical features important for high quality residential environments than the non-purpose-built supported housing facilities. The employed methods were thus seen to be able to describe and discriminate between qualities in the physical environment of supported housing facilities. Suggestions for the development of tools for the assessment of the physical environment in supported housing are made.

Quality of life and place attachment among people with severe mental illness

“…People with SMI assessed the quality of the physical environment of SHF with a postoccupancy evaluation questionnaire, which in line with Evans (2003) investigates to what extent the users perceive the design of the physical environment to provide for social interactions, privacy (perceived control) and restoration possibilities (Johansson & Brunt, 2012). The instrument contains 10 items with a 5-point response scale, the first 9 items have a scale in which '1' indicates 'totally disagree' to '5' that indicates 'totally agree', item 10 has a scale in which '1' indicates 'bad' and 5 indicates 'good'.…”

“…In Sweden, two levels of housing facilities are provided to people with SMI; congregate houses, with onsite professional workers, and outreach supported houses, which entails independent tenancies and regular visits from professionals (Swedish National Board of Health andWelfare, 2003, 2010). Both types of housing varies substantially in environmental quality and there are indications that institutional atmospheres are replicated in some of them (Johansson & Brunt, 2012;Marcheschi, Johansson, Brunt & Laike, 2014; Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare, 2003). Many countries are facing similar problems in providing suitable residential facilities for people with SMI (Fakhoury, Murray, Shepherd & Priebe, 2002).…”

“…Key questions thus remain about the extent to which the setting of SHF supports important functions for its residents i.e. to be in control of their environment, provide space for social interaction and restoration, and thereby contributes to i) supporting their users' well-being (Evans, Kantrowitz, & Eshelman, 2002;Evans, 2003;Knight & Haslam, 2010;Johansson & Brunt, 2012) and ii) their place attachment (Harkness et. al., 2004).…”

The meanings of place and space in forensic psychiatric care – A qualitative study reflecting patients’ point of view

“…). Similarly, Johansson and Brunt () report that purpose‐built housing facilities for patients with severe mental illness have an impact on the quality of the residential environment to a greater extent when compared to non‐purpose‐built facilities.…”

Architektur und Design psychiatrischer Einrichtungen

“…Verschiedene Studien zielen darauf ab, die Qualität der räumlichen Umgebung aus Sicht der relevanten Beteiligten zu evaluieren [42]. In diesem Zusammenhang geht es weniger um konkrete Interventionen als vielmehr um die Einschätzung der aktuellen Wohnsituation und ihrer Zusammenhänge mit der psychischen Gesundheit [43,44]. Erste Resultate lassen darauf schließen, dass eine subjektiv hohe Wohnqualität tatsächlich auch mit dem Wohlergehen assoziiert ist [45].…”