Critical perspectives on Arts on Prescription.

IF 3.5 4区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Perspectives in Public Health Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-12 DOI:10.1177/17579139231170776
H Bungay, A Jensen, N Holt
{"title":"Critical perspectives on Arts on Prescription.","authors":"H Bungay, A Jensen, N Holt","doi":"10.1177/17579139231170776","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The positive outcomes of engaging in the arts are increasingly reported in the research literature, supporting the use of the arts to enhance individual and community health and wellbeing. However, little attention is given to the less positive aspects of arts engagement. In some countries, healthcare practitioners and link workers can refer service-users experiencing mental health issues to social interventions such as Arts on Prescription (AoP) programmes. This critical review identifies problematic issues across such social prescriptions and AoP, including failures in arts and health projects, participants' negative experiences, and an absence of ethical guidelines for arts and health practice. Furthermore, it is evident that there is a lack of awareness and knowledge within healthcare systems, leading to inappropriate referrals, failure to take account of individual preferences, and a lack of communication between the third sector and healthcare services. Significantly, it is also unclear who holds the health responsibility for AoP participants. This article raises more questions than it answers, but for AoP to be effectively embedded in healthcare practice, the issues highlighted need to be addressed in order to safeguard participants and support the effective implementation of programmes more widely.</p>","PeriodicalId":47256,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives in Public Health","volume":" ","pages":"363-368"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11619186/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives in Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17579139231170776","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The positive outcomes of engaging in the arts are increasingly reported in the research literature, supporting the use of the arts to enhance individual and community health and wellbeing. However, little attention is given to the less positive aspects of arts engagement. In some countries, healthcare practitioners and link workers can refer service-users experiencing mental health issues to social interventions such as Arts on Prescription (AoP) programmes. This critical review identifies problematic issues across such social prescriptions and AoP, including failures in arts and health projects, participants' negative experiences, and an absence of ethical guidelines for arts and health practice. Furthermore, it is evident that there is a lack of awareness and knowledge within healthcare systems, leading to inappropriate referrals, failure to take account of individual preferences, and a lack of communication between the third sector and healthcare services. Significantly, it is also unclear who holds the health responsibility for AoP participants. This article raises more questions than it answers, but for AoP to be effectively embedded in healthcare practice, the issues highlighted need to be addressed in order to safeguard participants and support the effective implementation of programmes more widely.

“处方艺术”的批判视角。
越来越多的研究文献报道了参与艺术的积极成果,支持利用艺术来提高个人和社区的健康和福祉。然而,很少有人关注艺术参与的不那么积极的方面。在一些国家,卫生保健从业人员和联系工作人员可以将遇到精神健康问题的服务使用者转介到社会干预措施,如处方艺术(AoP)方案。这一批判性审查确定了这些社会处方和AoP中存在的问题,包括艺术和卫生项目的失败、参与者的负面经历以及缺乏艺术和卫生实践的道德准则。此外,很明显,在医疗保健系统内缺乏意识和知识,导致不适当的转诊,未能考虑到个人的喜好,以及第三部门和医疗保健服务之间缺乏沟通。值得注意的是,谁对AoP参与者的健康负责也不清楚。这篇文章提出的问题比它回答的要多,但是为了让AoP有效地嵌入到医疗保健实践中,需要解决突出的问题,以保护参与者并支持更广泛地有效实施项目。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Perspectives in Public Health
Perspectives in Public Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
1.70%
发文量
74
期刊介绍: Perspectives in Public Health is a bi-monthly peer-reviewed journal. It is practice orientated and features current topics and opinions; news and views on current health issues; case studies; book reviews; letters to the Editor; as well as updates on the Society"s work. The journal also commissions articles for themed issues and publishes original peer-reviewed articles. Perspectives in Public Health"s primary aim is to be an invaluable resource for the Society"s members, who are health-promoting professionals from many disciplines, including environmental health, health protection, health and safety, food safety and nutrition, building and engineering, primary care, academia and government.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信