On importance of new group therapy for decrease of agitation during the critical period of nursing shift changes on an acute psychiatric inpatient floor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Agitation is a significant challenge to mental healthcare. This project aims to examine the effects of implementing an interactive mental flexibility group to decrease incidences of agitation in the inpatient psychiatric population during nursing shift change.Methods: This observational study, conducted on the acute inpatient psychiatric unit of an academic hospital in Central NY, USA. This 23-bed unit admits psychiatric patients from the E.D. and local hospitals. The art-based interactive group was implemented during the critical period of nursing shift change, which is known for having an increased agitation due to caregiver changes. We tracked group attendance, incidences of agitation, and as-needed medication administration for agitation. We administered a Likert-type scale to rate emotions before and after each session.Results: We observed a dramatic decrease in as needed medications for agitation 1 month prior to group (n = 576) compared to 3 months during group (n = 120). The new group constitutes a significant decrease in agitation incidents. Patients indicated an increase in happiness (mean = 0.46, SD = 0.978), decrease in sadness (mean = 0.44, SD = 1.078), and decrease in anger (mean = 1.15, SD = 1.984).Conclusions: Our project indicates that the patients and staff well receive interactive group sessions in an acute psychiatric unit. The group sessions helped to decrease agitation and medication administration.Future directions: We recommend the utilization of interactive mental flexibility groups on acute psychiatric units to promote emotional regulation, especially during nursing shift change.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".