The Feasibility of Outdoor Psychology Sessions in an Adult Mental Health Inpatient Rehabilitation Unit: Service User and Psychologist Perspectives

Few studies have explored outdoor therapy when facilitated by clinical psychologists within an inpatient mental health service. In the present study, outdoor psychology sessions were introduced after service users (SUs) expressed a desire to return to face-to-face working during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to explore SUs’ and clinical psychologists’ perspectives on the feasibility of conducting outdoor therapy within the service. A mixed-method approach was underpinned by critical realist philosophy. Three psychologists maintained reflective diaries following outdoor therapy sessions with 16 SUs. A subsample of 14 SUs completed scales measuring therapeutic alliance and comfort during outdoor sessions. A subsample of eight SUs participated in semi-structured interviews. Data was analysed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Quantitative and qualitative data demonstrated high SU satisfaction with therapeutic alliance and comfort outdoors. Six themes were identified: utilising a person-centred approach; the value of multi-disciplinary team support; enhancing therapeutic engagement; the benefits of time away from the ward; managing confidentiality; physical health and safety. This feasibility study demonstrated the introduction of outdoor psychology sessions within an inpatient mental health service to be a viable response to COVID-19. The findings suggest outdoor therapy can be an effective and safe mode of therapy, and can offset the challenges of indoor working, providing certain risk factors are considered and managed. The limitations of this study and implications for clinical practice are discussed. Further research is now required to support future integration into clinical practice.

Inpatient Mental Healthcare before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Prior studies have demonstrated disruption to outpatient mental health services after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Inpatient mental health services have received less attention. The current study utilized an existing cohort of 33 Veterans Health Affairs (VHA) acute inpatient mental health units to examine disruptions to inpatient services. It further explored the association between patient demographic, clinical, and services variables on relapse rates. Inpatient admissions and therapeutic services (group and individual therapy and peer support) were lower amongst the COVID-19 sample than prior to the onset of COVID-19 while lengths of stay were longer. Relapse rates did not differ between cohorts. Patients with prior emergent services use as well as substance abuse or personality disorder diagnoses were at higher risk for relapse. Receiving group therapy while admitted was associated with lower risk of relapse. Inpatient mental health services saw substantial disruptions across the cohort. Inpatient mental health services, including group therapy, may be an important tool to prevent subsequent relapse.

Study protocol for a pilot high-intensity interval training intervention in inpatient mental health settings: a two-part study using a randomised controlled trial and naturalistic study design

Background Severe mental illnesses (SMI), including schizophrenia spectrum disorder, bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder, are associated with physical health comorbidities and premature mortality. Physical activity and structured exercise have a beneficial impact on cardiometabolic risk and ameliorate mental health symptomology and cognition. This protocol describes a feasibility study for a high-intensity interval training (HIIT) intervention among inpatients with SMI, to improve their physical and mental health. Methods The feasibility study follows a two-part design owing to COVID-19-related adaptations to project design: (a) a non-blinded randomised controlled trial (RCT) of 12 weeks of bicycle-based HIIT, delivered twice weekly in a face-to-face, one-to-one setting, compared to treatment as usual (TAU) and (b) a naturalistic study of inpatient HIIT; eligible participants will be invited to two sessions of HIIT per week, delivered by the research team remotely or in person. Additionally, participants in the naturalistic study may use the bike to conduct self-directed sessions of their chosen length and intensity. We will measure the feasibility and acceptability of the HIIT intervention as primary outcomes, alongside secondary and tertiary outcomes evaluating the physical, mental and cognitive effects of HIIT. The study aims to recruit 40 patients to the RCT and 6–8 patients to the naturalistic design. Discussion Exercise is a modifiable lifestyle barrier that can reverse cardiometabolic disease risk. If HIIT is found to be feasible and acceptable in inpatients with SMI, there would be scope for large-scale work to evaluate the clinical, cost and implementation effectiveness of HIIT in inpatient mental health settings. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03959735. Registered June 22, 2019.

A feasibility evaluation of Discovery Group: determining the acceptability and potential outcomes of a patient-led research group in a secure mental health inpatient setting

Background Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) is recognised as an essential part of health research. In addition to providing an opportunity for patients to shape health research and acquire research skills, in the inpatient mental health setting, PPIE may have additional value in providing meaningful activity and enhancing recovery, as defined using connectedness, hope, identity, meaning and empowerment (CHIME) principles. However, there have been challenges in applying PPIE principles in secure mental health inpatient settings. An eight -session PPIE programme (“Discovery Group”) was designed to support patient-led research in a secure mental health hospital. This feasibility study aims to evaluate the acceptability of the programme from the perspective of patients and identify potential outcomes. Methods A retrospective single-arm post-programme evaluation of Discovery Group was undertaken. Participants attended an evaluation workshop where they were interviewed individually to complete an acceptability questionnaire designed using the domains of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. Participants also completed an outcomes questionnaire, which included CHIME-based recovery items, and were invited to share their ideas for programme improvement on posters. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively. Direct content analysis was applied to qualitative data. Results In our sample, eight participants attended at least one session of the discovery group with one patient attending all sessions. Most of the participants felt positive about taking part in the group and expressed interest in joining another group in future. All participants experienced some burden from the effort required during group sessions, but a low level of opportunity cost in terms of the extent to which they perceived they had to forfeit benefits to participate in the programme.. Some described the group as effective in helping them learn about research. Of the five CHIME recovery domains, only connectedness was reported as a benefit of the group. The participants valued the opportunity to use their time well and demonstrate that they were undertaking purposeful activity as part of their rehabilitation and recovery. Conclusions Discovery Group is a tool to overcome barriers to effective PPIE in research in a secure inpatient mental health setting. The programme has a high level of acceptability among participants and offered several potential outcomes which require testing through further study.