The mental health detention process: a scoping review to inform GP training

2Citations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: GPs are often faced with deciding whether or not a patient may require detention for assessment in hospital under mental health legislation. This can be a complex and daunting process. Despite this, GPs and most other professionals receive limited formal training. Aim: To map and review the current literature on training in mental health detention processes. These insights are vital to inform the further development of meaningful educational approaches. Design & setting: A systematic scoping literature review was conducted to identify what is known about how best to develop training in this area. Method: Arksey and O’Malley’s framework was used to select, chart, and analyse articles from across six electronic databases. A total of 1136 articles were included in the initial screening phase and 183 articles were included in the full-text screening phase. Key themes were derived using an iterative and thematic approach. A personal and public involvement (PPI) group was set up for this project and other stakeholders in the mental health detention process were consulted about the findings. Results: Fifty-two articles were included in the final review. Professionals consistently highlighted unmet training needs and difficulties with the process. There were identified needs for practical, interdisciplinary training, including discussion of complex cases, and opportunities to learn from those with direct experience. Conclusion: This work is foundational for the development of meaningful educational approaches around mental health detention processes. A strong research base will inform and strengthen training with the ultimate aim of improving patient care.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Houton, P., Reid, H., Davidson, G., & Gormley, G. (2022). The mental health detention process: a scoping review to inform GP training. BJGP Open, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2022.0061

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free