PB CPD Online e-learning site
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Psychiatry Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Psychiatric Bulletin (2001) 25: 92-94. doi: 10.1192/pb.25.3.92
© 2001 The Royal College of Psychiatrists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Osborn, D. P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Tang, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Osborn, D. P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Tang, S.
Psychiatric Bulletin (2001) 25: 92-94
© 2001 The Royal College of Psychiatrists

Effectiveness of audit in improving interview room safety

David P. J. Osborn, MRC Clinical Research Fellow, Honorary Specialist Registrar

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Sciences, Royal Free and University College Medical School (Royal Free Campus), Rowland Hill Street, London NW3 2PF

Sylvia Tang, Specialist Registrar

Department of Psychiatry, Royal Free Hospital, London

AIMS AND METHODS

Safety features of rooms used for clinical interviews were assessed throughout our mental health unit. Following this pilot survey, 12 safety standards were agreed and adopted by a multi-disciplinary audit meeting. Recommendations were disseminated throughout the trust.

Adherence to the accepted standards for interview room safety was assessed at 6 months and 1 year after baseline. Following each assessment, results were presented so that the audit cycle was completed twice.

RESULTS

At 6 months 46 interview rooms were assessed against the 12 accepted standards and many were found to be unsatisfactory. After presentation of these results, the 1 year assessment discovered few changes in safety features of the 50 rooms now being used.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Unsafe rooms compromise the safety of staff and patients and this is clearly unacceptable. The audit process in itself failed as a method of improving standards.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Psychiatr. Bull.Home page
G. Rush, J. Reidy, B. Wright, F. Campbell, M. Ryan, G. Molyneux, A. Ambikapathy, and P. Leonard
Safety at work: national survey of psychiatrists in basic training in Ireland
Psychiatr. Bull., July 1, 2008; 32(7): 256 - 258.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Psychiatr. Bull.Home page
H. L. Campbell and N. K. Fung
How safe are patient interview rooms?
Psychiatr. Bull., January 1, 2007; 31(1): 10 - 13.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Adv. Psychiatr. Treat.Home page
S. E. Davison
The management of violence in general psychiatry
Advan. Psychiatr. Treat., September 1, 2005; 11(5): 362 - 370.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Psychiatry Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals
Copyright © 2001 The Royal College of Psychiatrists.