Background: Noise is an important aspect of the ward atmosphere climate – the combination of the architectural solutions, organizational features, the psychological traits of the operators and their interactions, and the patients’ characteristics. Despite its importance noise levels have been less analyzed than other aspects of the ward atmosphere climate. Aim: In this study the aim is to identify the sources of noise and the sound pressure level in an acute psychiatric ward, and secondly to ascertain whether this is perceived by inpatients as disturbing. Method: The sound pressure levels were measured during three nonconsecutive mornings, three afternoons, and three nights. A questionnaire was administered to ascertain patients’ opinions about the noise in the ward. Results: The average noise level in the ward was 62.5 dB(A)eq in the morning, 55.8 in the afternoon, and 51.5 at night. A total of 23 patients took part in the study: 65.2% of this sample did not perceive the noise in the ward as disturbing. Conclusion: In a psychiatric ward, the main source of noise is the verbal communication, and acoustic pressure also derived from care activities based around relationships. Other sources of noise perceived as disturbing came from the opening and closing of doors and the entry doorbell. Adopting relational and architectural-structural measures could reduce the sound pressure, with a view to further improving the ambience in the ward.

The ward climate or atmosphere refers to its material, emotional and social conditions. A good ward climate in psychiatric settings can influence the mood, behaviour and self‐concept of patients and staff members and improve patient outcomes. Many studies have examined the relationship between ward climate and aggression, but only a few have investigated the effect of a ward’s environment, rules and activities. This multicentric observational study aimed to assess the relationship between the rules/activities and the climate of four acute psychiatric units of Northern Italy. The Essen Climate Evaluation Scheme (EssenCES) questionnaire, which was administered to patients and staff, was used to evaluate the different dimensions of ward atmosphere. There was a good response rate (79%) in patients and staff members who completed the questionnaire (114 patients and 109 staff). Safety perception appeared to be quite different in patients and staff. The patients who were authorized to have more visiting hours and more time to use their mobile phone had higher scores on Experienced Safety subscale. A negative correlation between the Therapeutic Hold and Experienced Safety subscales was found in the staff members, and this was due to their negative perception. The ward climate seemed to be affected by the unit’s rules, especially with respect to visits and the smartphones use. Nurses need to be aware of the importance of ward climate and how their own perception may differ from and that of patients: this gap could lead to decisions detached from the patients’ needs.

Background/Objectives: Oral mucositis (OM) is a common complication in onco-hematological patients undergoing chemotherapy and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, negatively affecting comfort, nutrition, and quality of life. Despite existing assessment tools and recommendations, OM management—particularly non-pharmacological approaches—remains inconsistent, and evidence on nurses’ perspectives and contextual factors is limited. This study explored nurses’ perceptions and experiences regarding non-pharmacological treatments for OM, including educational needs and barriers and facilitators to implementation in clinical practice. Methods: A qualitative descriptive study using inductive content analysis was conducted. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with nurses working in onco-hematological settings in Italy. Data were analysed according to the Elo and Kyngäs framework. Results: Twelve nurses with extensive experience in onco-hematology and transplant care participated in the study. Five main themes emerged: (1) education and training pathways; (2) approaches to mucositis management; (3) nursing competence in OM care; (4) interprofessional collaboration; and (5) governance of practice, including protocols and guidelines. Findings highlighted strong experiential competence, high levels of nursing autonomy in assessment and patient education, and effective interprofessional collaboration, particularly in specialised settings. However, training pathways were predominantly informal, and the availability and use of protocols varied widely across clinical contexts. Conclusions: Non-pharmacological management of OM appears to be sustained primarily by advanced nursing competence and a specialised clinical culture rather than by structured education and standardised governance. Addressing educational gaps and promoting shared protocols may enhance the consistency, quality, and equity of supportive care while ensuring that the findings are clearly reflective of nurses’ experiences.