A service evaluation of passive remote monitoring technology for patients in a high-secure forensic psychiatric hospital: a qualitative study
File(s)s12888-023-05437-w.pdf (1.22 MB)
Published version
Author(s)
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
Background:
Technology has the potential to remotely monitor patient safety in real-time that helps staff and without disturbing the patient. However, staff and patients’ perspectives on using passive remote monitoring within an inpatient setting is lacking. The study aim was to explore stakeholders’ perspectives about using Oxehealth passive monitoring technology within a high-secure forensic psychiatric hospital in the UK as part of a wider mixed-methods service evaluation.
Methods:
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with staff and patients with experience of using Oxehealth technology face-to-face within a private room in Broadmoor Hospital. We applied thematic analysis to the data of each participant group separately. Themes and sub-themes were integrated, finalised, and presented in a thematic map. Design, management, and analysis was meaningfully informed by both staff and patients.
Results:
Twenty-four participants were interviewed (n = 12 staff, n = 12 patients). There were seven main themes: detecting deterioration and improving health and safety, “big brother syndrome”, privacy and dignity, knowledge and understanding, acceptance, barriers to use and practice issues and future changes needed. Oxehealth technology was considered acceptable to both staff and patients if the technology was used to detect deterioration and improve patient’s safety providing patient’s privacy was not invaded. However, overall acceptance was lower when knowledge and understanding of the technology and its camera was limited. Most patients could not understand why both physical checks through bedroom windows, and Oxehealth was needed to monitor patients, whilst staff felt Oxehealth should not replace physical checks of patients as reassures staff on patient safety.
Conclusions:
Oxehealth technology is considered viable and acceptable by most staff and patients but there is still some concern about its possible intrusive nature. However, more support and education for new patients and staff to better understand how Oxehealth works in the short- and long-term could be introduced to further improve acceptability. A feasibility study or pilot trial to compare the impact of Oxehealth with and without physical checks may be needed.
Technology has the potential to remotely monitor patient safety in real-time that helps staff and without disturbing the patient. However, staff and patients’ perspectives on using passive remote monitoring within an inpatient setting is lacking. The study aim was to explore stakeholders’ perspectives about using Oxehealth passive monitoring technology within a high-secure forensic psychiatric hospital in the UK as part of a wider mixed-methods service evaluation.
Methods:
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with staff and patients with experience of using Oxehealth technology face-to-face within a private room in Broadmoor Hospital. We applied thematic analysis to the data of each participant group separately. Themes and sub-themes were integrated, finalised, and presented in a thematic map. Design, management, and analysis was meaningfully informed by both staff and patients.
Results:
Twenty-four participants were interviewed (n = 12 staff, n = 12 patients). There were seven main themes: detecting deterioration and improving health and safety, “big brother syndrome”, privacy and dignity, knowledge and understanding, acceptance, barriers to use and practice issues and future changes needed. Oxehealth technology was considered acceptable to both staff and patients if the technology was used to detect deterioration and improve patient’s safety providing patient’s privacy was not invaded. However, overall acceptance was lower when knowledge and understanding of the technology and its camera was limited. Most patients could not understand why both physical checks through bedroom windows, and Oxehealth was needed to monitor patients, whilst staff felt Oxehealth should not replace physical checks of patients as reassures staff on patient safety.
Conclusions:
Oxehealth technology is considered viable and acceptable by most staff and patients but there is still some concern about its possible intrusive nature. However, more support and education for new patients and staff to better understand how Oxehealth works in the short- and long-term could be introduced to further improve acceptability. A feasibility study or pilot trial to compare the impact of Oxehealth with and without physical checks may be needed.
Date Issued
2023-12-14
Date Acceptance
2023-12-03
Citation
BMC Psychiatry, 2023, 23
ISSN
1471-244X
Publisher
BMC
Journal / Book Title
BMC Psychiatry
Volume
23
Copyright Statement
© The Author(s) 2023. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
License URL
Publication Status
Published
Article Number
ARTN 946