In the published article, there was an error. In the Abstract, Results, constant observation (CO) in unit B was incorrectly described as having increased with outdoor space inaccessibility in 2024, rather than decreased. CO in unit A was incorrectly described as having no change with outdoor space inaccessibility, when there was actually a decrease when compared to 2022, although not to 2023. This paragraph previously stated:
“On unit B, outdoor space inaccessibility was significantly associated with higher IM PRN use (mean difference = 1.57 orders/day, 95% CI [0.81, 2.33]), seclusion and restraint (mean difference = 0.63 orders/day, 95% CI [0.35, 0.91]), and CO (mean difference = 0.40 orders/day, 95% CI [0.17, 0.63]), with no significant change in PO PRN. On unit A, outdoor space inaccessibility was associated with an increase in PO PRN use (mean difference = 0.64 orders/day, 95% CI [0.26, 1.02]), but IM PRN, seclusion and restraint, and CO did not show a statistically significant change.”
The corrected paragraph appears below:
“On unit B, outdoor space inaccessibility was significantly associated with increased IM PRN use (mean difference = 1.57 orders/day, 95% CI [0.81, 2.33]), increased seclusion and restraint (mean difference = 0.63 orders/day, 95% CI [0.35, 0.91]), and decreased CO (mean difference = 0.40 orders/day, 95% CI [0.17, 0.63]), with no significant change in PO PRN. On unit A, outdoor space inaccessibility was associated with an increase in PO PRN use (mean difference = 0.64 orders/day, 95% CI [0.26, 1.02]), while IM PRN, seclusion and restraint, and CO did not show any statistically significant increase.”
The original article has been updated.
Statements
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Summary
Keywords
acute psychiatry, constant observation, outdoor space, PRN medication, restraint, seclusion
Citation
Liu K, Saito E and Linder H (2026) Correction: Healing spaces: a retrospective cohort study on the effect of outdoor spaces in psychiatric inpatient units on PRN medication use, seclusion/restraints, and constant observation. Front. Psychiatry 17:1796681. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2026.1796681
Received
26 January 2026
Revised
26 January 2026
Accepted
01 February 2026
Published
06 February 2026
Volume
17 - 2026
Edited and reviewed by
Stefano Barlati, University of Brescia, Italy
Updates
Copyright
© 2026 Liu, Saito and Linder.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Howard Linder, Hlinder@northwell.edu
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.