How people who self‐harm negotiate the inpatient environment: the mental healthcare workers perspective

Accessible summary What is known about the subject? Self‐harm plays a function, commonly in the form of distress management. There has been little focussed exploration of how individuals who use self‐harm to manage distress cope when prevented from self‐harm in an inpatient environment and how staff respond to this issue. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This paper uses the experiences of mental health staff to add to the existing knowledge that self‐harm has a functional role and supports the notion that interventions for self‐harm should focus on the origins of distress. It describes the potential consequences that focussing on prevention of self‐harm as opposed to actually managing distress may have on service‐users, how staff attempt to manage these consequences and factors that may impact on staff interventions to prevent further distress/harm. What are the implications for practice? The findings suggest that mental healthcare staff should aim to understand the function of self‐harm, use this understanding to develop an individualized care plan with the aim of managing distress and identify barriers to the effectiveness of the interventions so they can be worked around. Introduction Literature describes self‐harm as functional and meaningful. This creates difficulties for service‐users detained in an inpatient environment where self‐harm is prevented. Aim Mental healthcare staff were interviewed to build on existing evidence of issues with the prevention approach and explore, from a staff perspective, how self‐harm prevention impacts on service‐users, how they manage distress and how this impacts on staff and their approach to care. Methods Qualitative methods were used to allow unexpected themes to arise. Ten semi‐structured interviews were carried out with mental healthcare staff and thematically analysed. Findings and discussion The findings provide new evidence on the benefits and limitations of the inpatient environment for individuals who self‐harm. Findings indicate that being unable to self‐harm can lead to a continuation of distress and subsequent potentially harmful attempts to manage distress. Staff described experiencing a struggle for control in preventing self‐harm, leading to increasingly harmful methods of self‐harm. Alternatively some staff were able to support service‐users with distress management. We discuss factors influencing which of these ‘paths’ service‐users followed. Implications Considerations for care planning in