Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT02724748

Managing Patient Aggression in Mental Health Services

To compare the effects of an educational intervention to usual practice (no specified staff education) on improving treatment culture and supporting team climate in staff members, which further could reduce the need for the use of coercive methods in psychiatric care.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year–99 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

About this study

This is a single-blind, two-arm, cluster randomised controlled trial involving 28 psychiatric hospital wards across Finland.

Units are randomised on an equal basis to receive either staff educational programme (designed together with staff members, patients and relatives on the study units) or standard care. Inpatient psychiatric hospital organisations are the unit of randomisation. The cluster design will be used to avoid contamination between individual staff members in each study ward. We will use centralized randomisation at the University of Turku (Department of Mathematics and Statistics). Randomisation will be fully concealed and computer-generated by an independent statistician, who is not involved in the study. Investigators enrolling wards cannot foresee assignment. Outcome assessors and statisticians will be kept blinded to allocation. However, due to the type of intervention, allocation will be unmasked to patients and their relatives, contact persons in each ward, and health care staff delivering patient care on the wards after randomisation; this would reflect real-world care. While the Data Monitoring Committee undertook ongoing safety surveillance, investigators running the preliminary analysis for the Data Monitoring Committee will be masked to data until investigators released the database. Further, the statisticians and the National Register holder who are responsible in Finnish routine data used in this study, will be masked to ward allocation and patient data in each group. Randomisation will be done after collecting the baseline data from each unit.

Baseline data on coercive practices used on the units will be collected by the members of the research team with a help of staff members within the eight weeks, while observational and interview data related to the quality of the services will be collected by the research team (only in the intervention units). On the individual level, all staff members working in the study units, patients, and their relatives are eligible to participate in the study. Staff survey and interviews with staff members, patient groups and relatives will be done on the basis of free will. The staff of the unit/research team members will approach patients and their relatives to explain the purpose of the study and its arrangements orally and in written format. The opportunity to ask questions about the study will be given to them. Those that will be assessed having a lack of capacity to give informed consent and declined to participate will not be interviewed. Staff surveys will be repeated for baseline and follow-up. On the organisational level, the outcomes related to patient service use will be assessed 12 and 24 months after baseline data collection.

Assessing quality components: The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats related to the new practices will also be discussed and categorised based on SWOT analysis (Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, Threat). Possible barriers and facilitating factors for change on the on each unit will be identified. The quality of the service facilities will be assessed by observations on the units, based on World Health Organization's (2012) QualityRight Tool Kit focusing on five central quality criteria.

We have systematically searched for, but found no directly relevant past work. We assume that if the data will be obtained from local hospital registers by sampling 7 clusters (hospitals) with 265 subjects each in intervention group and 7 clusters with 265 subjects each in control group, we will have 80% power to detect a difference between the group proportions of -0.0400. The control group proportion is 0.1100. The intervention group proportion is assumed to be 0.1100 under the null hypothesis and 0.0700 under the alternative hypothesis. The test statistic used is the two-sided Z test (unpooled) with an overall significance level at 0.05. We may assume based on the hospital registers that sample size for the total population admitted in the study wards in one year will be 3710. However, if we consider a loss of 20% patients in the local care registers, the total number of patients on the randomised wards should be about 4454 patients. Further, if we assume 50% response rate for patient survey out of possible 3710 participants, we will assume that we will obtain 928 filled questionnaires during 6 month survey data collection period. The sample size calculation was adjusted for intra-cluster correlation at 0.005.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Finnish speaking hospital organisations
  • at least 1 psychiatric ward
  • open 24/7
  • are able to use coersive measures (seclusion room, limb restraint, forced medication, physical restraint)

Exclusion criteria

  • wards specialised in forensic, psychogeriatric, or child and adolescent care alone
  • similar type of project is underway or is planned to start

Treatment and study plan

Educational intervention

Behavioral

Educational intervention for staff members will encourage collaboration between patients, relatives and staff members. Skills, intellectual resources, motivation and encouragement among staff members to make changes on the unit will be supported. More detailed content of the intervention to be used in each unit will be tailored based on preparatory phase of the study and individual needs of the unit. The educational intervention will be carried out beside usual care.

Primary outcomes

  1. The incidence of seclusion room use.

    Time frame: Three years

    The incidence of seclusion room use by patients in each unit.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Other types of coercive measures

    Time frame: Three years

    Organisational outcomes. Incidence of other types of coercive measures used on patients (limb restraint, forced injection, physical restraint).

  2. Service use

    Time frame: Three years

    Organisational outcomes. Type of admission, length of stay, deaths.

  3. Team climate

    Time frame: 18-20 months after beginning of the intervention

    Staff outcomes. Team Climate Inventory, TCI.

  4. Turnover

    Time frame: Three years

    Staff outcomes.

  5. The functional capacity of patients

    Time frame: Nine months after beginning of the intervention

    Patient outcomes. Gobal Assessment Scale, GAS.

  6. Patient treatment satisfaction

    Time frame: Nine months after beginning of the intervention

    Patient outcomes. Client Satisfaction Questionnaire, CSQ-8.

  7. Quality of Life

    Time frame: Nine months after beginning of the intervention

    Patient outcomes. Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form, Q-LES-Q-SF

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

University of Turku

Other

Collaborators

  • Academy of Finland
  • Harvard Medical School (HMS and HSDM)
  • Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH)
  • Sichuan University of China, China
  • Stanford University
  • The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
  • Turku University Hospital
  • University of Nottingham
  • World Health Organisation, Philippines

Registry information

Official study title

The Effectiveness of User-driven Intervention to Manage Patient Aggression in Mental Health Services

Acronym: Violin

Important dates

Study start
2016
Primary completion
2018
Study completion
2018
First posted
Mar 31, 2016
Registry last updated
Feb 26, 2020

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.