Hospitalized children's experience of a Fairy Garden in Northern Thailand.
Pamela van der Riet, Chaweewan Jitsacorn, Peter Thursby
PMID 32587727WHAT IT FOUND
Hospitalized children said the Fairy Garden let them play, imagine, feel happy, and connect with family or home.
Some described distraction. This reports experience, not proof of clinical benefit.
Key findings
01The analysis produced five interrelated threads: illness experience, imagination and fantasy, connections to place, family and home, social play, and happiness and enjoyment.
02The children said the garden made them feel happy and joyful.
03Only two participants drew other children in the garden with them.
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 study was done in a single hospital unit and included a small number of children, so the threads may not apply to other settings or populations. Only children who were well enough to take part and could access the garden were included, so children who were too unwell, infectious, or receiving scheduled treatments are not represented. The researchers did not examine the developmental level of the drawings in detail, so some drawings may reflect age-typical representation rather than the garden experience. The authors did not report gender differences in the drawings, so possible differences between boys and girls were not analysed. Narrative inquiry aims to understand experience, not to test whether the garden caused happiness or improved care.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude the Fairy Garden improved clinical outcomes or reduced distress. The study asked children to describe their experience, and the findings are themes from drawings and interviews, not measured effects.