Sustaining a therapeutic environment within mental health in-patient settings during COVID-19. Results of a Delphi study

Abstract

Aim: Develop a strengths-based, person-centred, trauma-informed and recovery-oriented framework to mitigate any potential increase in conflict resulting from the implementation of C19 restrictions. Background: Guidance addressing the unique challenges posed by Covid-19 within mental health in-patient settings, including how to support those whose distress may present as behaviour that challenges including violence and self-harm, remains urgently needed. Methodology/approach: A Delphi design involving four iterative stages was adopted. Stage 1 involved a review and synthesis of COVID-19-related public health and ethical guidance and a narrative literature review. A formative operational framework was then developed. Stage 2 sought to establish the face validity of the framework through engagement with frontline and senior staff in mental health services in Ireland, Denmark and Netherlands. Stage 3 investigated the content validity of the final framework through a plenary presentation and discussion of the framework at a scientific symposium of the European Violence in Psychiatric Research Group (EViPRG, 2020). Stage 4 sought expert appraisal of the framework using a structured evaluation completed by a panel of eighteen multidisciplinary experts from nine countries, including four academics, six clinicians and eight holding dual clinical/academic appointments to assess content validity. Results: The guidance adopts the widely advocated approach to support those whose distress may present as behaviour services find challenging in identifying the need for primary, secondary, tertiary and recovery measures. It emphasizes person-centred care while integrating specific Covid-19 public health requirements into service planning. It also aligns with contemporary best practice in in-patient mental health care, incorporating the principles of Safewards, the core values of trauma-informed care, and an explicit on recovery. Conclusion: The guidance developed has face and content validity.