A systematic review on the use of action research methods in mental health nursing care.
Antonio R Moreno-Poyato, Martí Subias-Miquel, Diana Tolosa-Merlos and 10 others
PMID 36300724WHAT IT FOUND
Mental health nursing action research was most often participatory and aimed to improve person-centred care and decision-making, such as seclusion, risk assessment and recovery-focused practice.
It describes how projects were run, not proof that patients benefited.
Key findings
01The review included 16 studies of action research in mental health nursing care, conducted in inpatient and community settings.
02Participatory action research was the most common method, and studies focused on improving person-centred care and decision-making procedures.
03Six studies did not explicitly describe the action research cycles and stages, so reported changes are not always traceable.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The review searched only English-language studies, so non-English work may be missing. Search terms may have limited the scope of articles found. Included studies varied in quality, and the authors did not exclude studies for poor quality. Only studies reporting the full action research process were included, so partial reports or multi-article projects may be missing. Some studies did not explicitly describe cycles and stages, so it is hard to trace what changed. Patients were involved in only some included studies, so findings may reflect staff perspectives more than patient experience.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflict of interest and no funding.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as evidence that action research improves patient outcomes. The review synthesises qualitative reports of how nurses used the method, not measured patient benefit.