Introduction: This study sought to explore the meaning of the recovery process and its stages from the perspective of people attending a mental health day hospital.Methods: A descriptive exploratory qualitative study was carried out. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with people attending a mental health day hospital. The data were analysed deductively by means of content analysis.Results: The participants described the recovery process as a process based on three pillars; the attitude towards recovery, hardship, and the effort required throughout the process. Regarding the stages of recovery, for the participants in the first stage of the process (Moratorium), the search for hope was the most important element. In the second stage (Awareness), the reestablishment of their identity, through the acceptance of the consequences derived from the mental health problem, together with being able to feel full and fulfilled, were the most outstanding elements. In the third stage (Preparation), participants highlighted the search for meaning in life, facing their fears and the process with an open mind. Finally, the last two stages (Rebuilding and Growth) were related to taking responsibility and empowerment for recovery.Conclusions: The results of this study provide insight into the perception of the recovery process and its stages in people attending a mental health day hospital. These findings may contribute to aligning the nurse–patient perspective, helping nurses to understand the key elements of patients according to their stage of recovery, and thus be able to subsequently individualise interventions.Patient and Public Contribution: This study was based on interviews with 15 patients receiving treatment at an adult mental health day hospital. This study would not have been possible without their participation.

Introduction: Given that recovery‐oriented care focuses on empowering individuals with mental health challenges, collaborative care can be an effective tool for nurses in mental health day hospitals.Aim: To deepen knowledge about the impact of collaborative nursing care for improving health outcomes of mental health day hospital users.Methods: A sequential and transformative mixed methods study was designed. In the first phase of this mixed methods study, quantitative data were collected from 144 users of mental health day hospitals. In phase two, a group of users underwent an intervention based on collaborative nursing care, through participatory action research, and qualitative data were collected. Finally, quantitative data were again collected from all users.Results: The users who participated in the intervention group improved quantitatively in terms of the quality of the therapeutic relationship. They also improved at different stages of the recovery process, thus the qualitative results confirmed that collaborative nursing care was an essential component in their recovery process.Discussion: The findings highlight the critical role of collaborative nursing care in health outcomes. The therapeutic relationship was identified as a key factor in facilitating patient empowerment.Implications: The study supports implementing collaborative nursing care models in mental health settings to enhance patient outcomes.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04814576

Aim: To examine the association between perceived quality of care and the level of coercion experienced by individuals hospitalised in acute mental health units. Design: National cross‐sectional study. Methods: Data were collected from 255 patients admitted to 12 acute mental health units across Spain. Standardised instruments assessed perceived quality of care and levels of coercion, humiliation and fear at discharge. Multiple linear regression analyses were used to explore associations between care quality dimensions and patients' experiences. Results: Perceived quality of care was significantly associated with lower levels of perceived coercion and humiliation. All dimensions of care quality showed inverse associations, with the “secluded” dimension showing the strongest association. The association between care quality and perceived fear was less consistent. These findings are particularly relevant for mental health nurses, who play a central role in delivering relational care and ensuring patients' emotional safety. Conclusion: Higher perceived quality of care is associated with lower levels of coercion, humiliation, and fear during hospitalisation in acute mental health settings. Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care: For mental health nursing, these results underscore the critical role of nurses in creating therapeutic environments that reduce coercive experiences. By fostering trust, promoting patient autonomy, and ensuring emotional and physical safety, nurses can significantly influence the quality of care and patient outcomes. Impact: The study addresses the lack of evidence on how perceived quality of care influences experiences of coercion in acute mental health settings. Better perceived care quality is linked to reduced feelings of coercion, humiliation and fear. The research has direct implications for mental health nurses, clinical educators and healthcare managers aiming to improve patient experiences and reduce coercive practices in psychiatric care. Reporting Method: STROBE reporting guideline. Patient or Public Contribution: No patient or public contribution.

This study examined how community mental health case managers, most of whom were mental health nurses, modified their day‐to‐day practice to strengthen the therapeutic relationship within community services. Using a participatory action research design across 10 centres in Catalonia, Spain, 24 case managers and 105 patients engaged in two action‐reflection cycles. Data from reflective diaries and focus groups were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Through cyclical observation and collaborative reflection, participants identified key facilitators and barriers to developing the therapeutic relationship and co‐designed two practice innovations: (1) jointly‐created informational materials clarifying case‐management scope and expectations, and (2) regular mixed patient‐professional reflective groups focused on the therapeutic process. Despite structural pressures, heavy workloads, service fragmentation, and limited opportunities for professional reflection, the participatory approach supported sustainable, relationally focused practice change grounded in patient‐provider dialogue. Embedding structured reflective spaces within routine care emerged as a practical mechanism to consolidate therapeutic alliance and advance recovery‐oriented practice. While findings apply across disciplines, they are particularly relevant to nursing‐led and nurse‐participating case‐management teams, in which continuous therapeutic contact, coordination functions and relational expertise intersect. The study offers a replicable framework for enhancing person‐centred care in community mental health settings, and it underscores the value of nurse‐involved co‐creation and structured reflection to maintain therapeutic presence, align expectations and integrate lived experience into ongoing quality improvement.

Introduction: Mental health nurses play a central role in administering long‐acting injectable antipsychotic treatment and developing therapeutic relationships with people with severe mental disorder. However, patients' satisfaction with this treatment modality is not routinely assessed, potentially limiting person‐centred care. Aim: To examine treatment satisfaction among people with severe mental disorder receiving long‐acting injectable antipsychotic treatment in community mental health services, and to explore associations between satisfaction with this treatment and sociodemographic variables. Method: Cross‐sectional observational study with 81 adults attending a community mental health service in Barcelona, Spain. Treatment satisfaction was assessed using the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM v.1.4), and functional independence was assessed using the Barthel Index. Data were collected through structured nurse‐led interviews. Results: Participants reported high satisfaction with treatment convenience, effectiveness and global experience. One quarter reported treatment‐related side effects. Convenience scores differed significantly by sex, marital status and age, with higher scores among women and older participants. Foreign‐born participants reported higher effectiveness scores than Spanish participants. Most participants were functionally independent, with no significant differences in treatment satisfaction according to functional independence. Discussion: Routine assessment of treatment satisfaction by mental health nurses may provide an opportunity to identify treatment‐related concerns and support communication about care. Limitations: Single‐site, cross‐sectional design limits transferability and precludes causal inference. Implications for Practice: Incorporating brief, structured assessment of treatment satisfaction and perceived side effects into routine long‐acting injectable antipsychotic administration may help nurses identify treatment‐related concerns and support communication with patients. Recommendations: Multicentre longitudinal studies are needed to examine how patient‐reported satisfaction relates to clinical outcomes and therapeutic alliance. Embedding validated patient‐reported outcome measures into routine nursing protocols for long‐acting injectable antipsychotic administration is recommended.