Integrating a virtual reality relaxation clinic within acute psychiatric services: A pilot study.

People with acute psychiatric conditions experience heightened stress, which is associated with worsened symptoms and increased violence on psychiatric wards. Traditional stress management techniques can be challenging for patients. Virtual reality (VR) relaxation appears promising to reduce stress; however, research on VR for psychiatric wards is limited. This mixed-methods study investigated feasibility and acceptability of integrating a VR relaxation clinic within acute psychiatric services. The study evaluated a VR relaxation session for inpatients and outpatients with acute psychiatric conditions (N = 42) and therapists' (N = 6) experience facilitating VR sessions for patients. Self-report assessments of psychological wellbeing were completed by patients pre- and post-VR. Patients and therapists provided qualitative feedback. The number of violent incidents and restrictive practices on the wards in the 12 weeks before VR implementation was compared to the first 12 weeks of VR. Post-VR, there were statistically significant increases in patients' relaxation, happiness, and connectedness to nature, and decreases in stress, anxiety, and sadness. Qualitative findings indicate patients found sessions enjoyable, relaxing, and helpful. Therapists provided positive feedback but highlighted practical challenges. Violent incidents and restrictive practices halved during VR implementation. VR relaxation appears feasible and acceptable in acute services. Larger studies should evaluate potential impact on psychiatric wards.

The Safety of Digital Mental Health Interventions: Systematic Review and Recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) for common mental health conditions are effective. However, digital interventions, such as face-to-face therapies, pose risks to patients. A safe intervention is considered one in which the measured benefits outweigh the identified and mitigated risks. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to review the literature to assess how DMHIs assess safety, what risks are reported, and how they are mitigated in both the research and postmarket phases and building on existing recommendations for assessing, reporting, and mitigating safety in the DMHI and standardizing practice. METHODS: PsycINFO, Embase, and MEDLINE databases were searched for studies that addressed the safety of DMHIs. The inclusion criteria were any study that addressed the safety of a clinical DMHI, even if not as a main outcome, in an adult population, and in English. As the outcome data were mainly qualitative in nature, a meta-analysis was not possible, and qualitative analysis was used to collate the results. Quantitative results were synthesized in the form of tables and percentages. To illustrate the use of a single common safety metric across studies, we calculated odds ratios and CIs, wherever possible. RESULTS: Overall, 23 studies were included in this review. Although many of the included studies assessed safety by actively collecting adverse event (AE) data, over one-third (8/23, 35%) did not assess or collect any safety data. The methods and frequency of safety data collection varied widely, and very few studies have performed formal statistical analyses. The main treatment-related reported AE was symptom deterioration. The main method used to mitigate risk was exclusion of high-risk groups. A secondary web-based search found that 6 DMHIs were available for users or patients to use (postmarket phase), all of which used indications and contraindications to mitigate risk, although there was no evidence of ongoing safety review. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review show the need for a standardized classification of AEs, a standardized method for assessing AEs to statically analyze AE data, and evidence-based practices for mitigating risk in DMHIs, both in the research and postmarket phases. This review produced 7 specific, measurable, and achievable recommendations with the potential to have an immediate impact on the field, which were implemented across ongoing and future research. Improving the quality of DMHI safety data will allow meaningful assessment of the safety of DMHIs and confidence in whether the benefits of a new DMHI outweigh its risks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022333181; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=333181.

Videoconference-based Creativity Workshops for mental health staff during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 presented significant challenges to psychiatric staff, while social distancing and remote working necessitated digital communications. NHS England prioritised staff wellbeing. Arts-based creativity interventions appear to improve psychological wellbeing, so this study evaluated online Creativity Workshops as a staff support response for COVID-19-related stress. METHODS: Participants were staff from a South London NHS psychiatric hospital. Group Creativity Workshops were facilitated via Microsoft Teams. Acceptability data on pre- and post-workshop mood and attitudes were self-reported by participants. Feasibility data were gathered from adherence to number of workshop components delivered. RESULTS: Eight workshops were delivered in May-September 2020 (N = 55) with high adherence to components. Participants reported significantly increased positive mood and attitudes towards themselves and others; and decreased stress and anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: Online Creativity Workshops appear feasible and acceptable in reducing stress in psychiatric staff. Integrating a programme of Creativity Workshops within healthcare staff support may benefit staff wellbeing.

Virtual reality relaxation for people with mental health conditions: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Vulnerability to stress is linked to poor mental health. Stress management interventions for people with mental health conditions are numerous but they are difficult to implement and have limited effectiveness in this population. Virtual reality (VR) relaxation is an innovative intervention that aims to reduce stress. This review aimed to synthesize evidence of VR relaxation for people with mental health conditions (PROSPERO 269405). METHODS: Embase, Medline, PsycInfo, and Web of Science were searched until 17th September 2021. The review was carried out according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. The Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) tool assessed methodological quality of studies. RESULTS: Searching identified 4550 studies. Eighteen studies (N = 848) were included in the review. Studies were published between 2008 and 2021. Eleven were conducted in Europe. Thirteen studies were controlled trials. Participants were mostly working-age adult outpatients experiencing anxiety or stress-related conditions. Other conditions included eating disorders, depression, bipolar disorder, and psychosis. Five studies tested inpatients. All studies used a range of nature-based virtual environments, such as forests, islands, mountains, lakes, waterfalls, and most commonly, beaches to promote relaxation. Studies provided evidence of the feasibility, acceptability, and short-term effectiveness of VR relaxation to increase relaxation and reduce stress. EPHPP ratings were 'strong' (N = 11), 'moderate' (N = 4), and 'weak' (N = 3). CONCLUSIONS: VR relaxation has potential as a low-intensity intervention to promote relaxation and reduce stress for adults with mental health conditions, especially anxiety and stress-related problems. Further research is warranted on this promising intervention.