Search results

to evaluate the experiences of knowledge workers who work in shared workspaces and those who moved from single-cell offices to shared workspaces.

Knowledge workers were surveyed before and after 34% moved from single-cell offices to shared workspaces. The authors exploit this panel design in the analysis.

Shared offices were rated as providing more distraction, less privacy and worsened indoor environment quality (IEQ) (p < 0.05). Perceptions of collaboration and networking also declined in shared workspaces. Distraction and a lack of privacy were negatively associated with self-reported productivity (p < 0.10). Neither IEQ nor collaboration nor networking was significantly associated with productivity. The perceptions of those who moved to shared workspaces and those who had worked in shared workspaces all along were statistically indistinguishable.

The quasi-experimental control provides evidence that it is the office type, not the experience of moving, that accounts for the evaluative changes. There are limitations inherent in using a self-rating performance measure.

Organisations should be aware that the positive outcomes ascribed to shared spaces may not be apparent and that demands may outweigh benefits.

Knowledge workers are particularly impacted by distraction and interruptions to concentrated work. The quasi-experimental design controlled for the Hawthorne effect, demonstrating that it is the office type, not the move, that accounts for differences in perceptions.

Patients with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) present with specific assessment, specific difficulties, needs and therapeutic issues and therefore are a challenging group for forensic services. Given the challenge that individuals with ASD present to forensic services, the suggested increase in the number of this group within this setting and the relatively little amount of research which suggests they face a number of difficulties within the prison environment, the purpose of this paper is to identify and review all the studies which have been carried out investigating any aspect of ASD in relation to secure hospital settings.

Seven internet-based bibliographic databases were used for the present review. The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

A total of 12 studies were included in this review; 3 looked at the prevalence of ASD in secure psychiatric hospitals. One study evaluated the clinical utility of the AQ screening tool to assess self-reported autistic traits in secure psychiatric settings. Three explored any type of characteristics of patients with ASD detained in secure psychiatric hospitals. One study investigated the experiences or quality of life of patients with an ASD detained in secure psychiatric care. Two studies investigated awareness, knowledge and/or views regarding patients with ASD held by staff working within secure psychiatric hospitals. Lastly, three studies (one of which was also included in the prevalence category above) looked at the effectiveness of interventions or treatment of patients with ASD in secure psychiatric hospitals. Clinical recommendations and future research directions are discussed.

To the author’s knowledge, this is the first review to explore what research has been carried out looking specifically at patients with ASD in relation to secure forensic settings.