Using arts to enhance mental healthcare environments: Findings from qualitative research

Abstract

This paper reports on a qualitative study of the subjective impact of a visual arts project in a Mental Health NHS Trust in England. A qualitative approach was adopted including documentary analysis, focus groups and over 50 in-depth interviews.

Arts were found to help shape healing environments through four processes: modernisation; enhancing valued features; diminishing negative aspects; and creating opportunities for service users and staff.

Responses to the artworks were diverse, and modernisation was sometimes perceived as diminishing staff and service users' control over the environment. Arts seemed to be strongly valued when they enhanced control and enabled service users to affirm non-stigmatised identities.

Arts projects in similar settings are likely to face complex issues of control, identity and stake. A key challenge is balancing “prestige” with “authenticity.” While consensus may be difficult to achieve, the study points towards the high value that stakeholders place on arts in these settings.

Keywords:

• arts
• environment
• mental health
• participation
• qualitative research

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the reviewers of an earlier draft of this paper who gave valuable feedback and encouragement.

We are grateful to the many participants who gave their time to the study and to the NHS occupational and arts therapy staff who helped to facilitate the research in practice settings.

The research was a collaboration between UWE, Bristol, Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust and Willis Newson Arts Consultants. The Steering Group included Dr Mark Palmer, a digital artist and lecturer in the Bristol Institute of Technology, UWE, Bristol; Nola Davis, who as a service user representative, made an invaluable contribution at all stages; and arts consultants Jane Willis and Joanna Espiner, who led what was one of the largest hospital arts programmes in the UK.

The research was funded by the Estates and Facilities Division of the Department of Health. Responsibility for the views expressed within it lies with the authors and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Health.

Notes

^1. We are particularly grateful to Mark Palmer for his input into this phase of the research.