Healing Houses systematic review: design, sustainability, opportunities and barriers facing Soteria and peer respite development

Abstract

Background Soteria houses and peer respites, collectively called Healing Houses, are alternatives to psychiatric hospitalisation. Aims The aim of this research is to review Healing Houses in relation to design characteristics (architectural and service), sustainability and development opportunities and barriers. Methods This systematic review followed a PROSPERO protocol (CRD42022378089). Articles were identified from journal database searches, hand searching websites, Google Scholar searches, expert consultation and backwards and forward citation searches. Results Eight hundred and forty-nine documents were screened in three languages (English, German and Hebrew) and 45 documents were included from seven countries. The review highlights 11 architectural design characteristics (atmosphere, size, soft room, history, location, outdoor space, cleanliness, interior design, facilities, staff only areas and accessibility), six service design characteristics (guiding principles, living and working together, consensual treatment, staff, supporting personal meaning making and power), five opportunities (outcomes, human rights, economics, hospitalization and underserved) and four types of barriers (clinical, economic and regulatory, societal and ideological). The primary sustainability issue was long-term funding. Conclusion Future research should focus on operationalizing a “home-like” atmosphere and the impact of design features such as green spaces on wellbeing of staff and service users. Future research could also produce design guidelines for Healing Houses.