Skip to main content
. 2015 Sep;52(9):1412–1422. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.05.001

Table 2.

Estimates of treatment effects for Safewards interventions relative to control for primary and secondary outcomes.

Outcome Estimate 95% CI p-Value
Primary outcome
 PCC conflict
  Count rate ratio 0.850 0.763–0.943 0.001
  Hurdle rate ratioa 1.139 0.915–1.426 0.234



 PCC containment
  Count rate ratio 0.768 0.655–0.901 0.004
  Hurdle rate ratioa 1.044 0.828–1.336 0.708



Secondary outcomesb
 WAS
  Order and organisation −0.315 −0.792 to 0.163 0.197
  Programme clarity 0.267 −0.218 to 0.753 0.281
  Staff control −0.196 −0.568 to 0.176 0.301



 SHAS
  Total 0.227 −3.375 to 3.829 0.902



 APDQ
  Enjoyment 0.023 −0.13 to 0.176 0.768
  Security −0.079 −0.209 to 0.05 0.231
  Acceptance 0.067 −0.062 to 0.196 0.312
  Purpose −0.087 −0.28 to 0.1 0.388
  Enthusiasm 0.031 −0.178 to 0.24 0.772



 SF-36
  Physical health −1.85 −3.702 to 0.003 0.05
  Mental health −0.709 −2.962 to 1.544 0.537
a

Test for difference in number of zero event shifts between baseline implementation and outcome periods.

b

Positive figures represent increases or improvements on the experimental wards, negative figures increases or improvements on the control wards.