心理健康中的精神关怀和圣经框架咨询的多学科观念和考虑因素

Q4 Medicine
Valerie Oji, Bailey Powell
{"title":"心理健康中的精神关怀和圣经框架咨询的多学科观念和考虑因素","authors":"Valerie Oji, Bailey Powell","doi":"10.15566/cjgh.v11i1.845","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Religious/Spiritual (R/S) care is often desirable by mental health clients for culturally sensitive, patient-focused treatment; yet providers may experience hesitancy or overlook this need and treatment guidelines are limited. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore existing R/S care, as well as perspectives on what support care would be considered for patients choosing BFC. This is part of a project to collaboratively extend population-based mental health care access in resource–constrained communities of both the US, a High-Income Country (HIC) and Low-to-Middle Income Countries (LMICs) in Africa.  \n  \nMethods: A qualitative literature synthesis, then an online survey was conducted with 54 multidisciplinary participants recruited via snowballing. Survey participants were asked to review a case as described by a BFC provider and respond  anonymously to an open-ended questionnaire. The data collected was distilled with qualitative coding and thematic analysis.  \n  \nResults: Literature synthesis identified multidisciplinary health professional provision of R/S, medical and/or psychological interventions as monotherapy or integrated strategies. There was a paucity of medical education guidelines. Qualitative themes included willingness to coordinate care for BFC clients, to what capacity should care be provided, and perceptions of BFC efficacy. R/S care was often integrated as part of a holistic treatment approach. Scheduled BFC patient follow-ups, ethical hand-offs or referrals were considered important for majority of survey respondents based on comfort-level with biblical counseling and perceived relapse potential. Spiritual growth and maintenance, medication management, and individual psychotherapy were recommended by survey respondents. There were contrasts in BFC and non-R/S provider perspectives on pertinent mental health history and inferences from the case. Significant information for patient support included symptoms and confirmatory diagnosis, medical comorbidities, relevant childhood issues, faith-health beliefs, family history and genetics, medication and therapy adherence, and substance use. Faith-health belief congruence of providers with BFC patients and ethical decision-making should be considered. Graduate Medical Education (GME) and other health professional programs may incorporate these considerations, existing R/S interventions, and multidisciplinary provider scope of practice as options for clinician training. Future research steps should include growing the body of anecdotal case reports, evidence-based case series and implementation science studies across a broader range of mental disorders. \n ","PeriodicalId":52275,"journal":{"name":"Christian Journal for Global Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multidisciplinary Perceptions and Considerations for Spiritual Care and Biblical Framework Counseling in Mental Health\",\"authors\":\"Valerie Oji, Bailey Powell\",\"doi\":\"10.15566/cjgh.v11i1.845\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Religious/Spiritual (R/S) care is often desirable by mental health clients for culturally sensitive, patient-focused treatment; yet providers may experience hesitancy or overlook this need and treatment guidelines are limited. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore existing R/S care, as well as perspectives on what support care would be considered for patients choosing BFC. This is part of a project to collaboratively extend population-based mental health care access in resource–constrained communities of both the US, a High-Income Country (HIC) and Low-to-Middle Income Countries (LMICs) in Africa.  \\n  \\nMethods: A qualitative literature synthesis, then an online survey was conducted with 54 multidisciplinary participants recruited via snowballing. Survey participants were asked to review a case as described by a BFC provider and respond  anonymously to an open-ended questionnaire. The data collected was distilled with qualitative coding and thematic analysis.  \\n  \\nResults: Literature synthesis identified multidisciplinary health professional provision of R/S, medical and/or psychological interventions as monotherapy or integrated strategies. There was a paucity of medical education guidelines. Qualitative themes included willingness to coordinate care for BFC clients, to what capacity should care be provided, and perceptions of BFC efficacy. R/S care was often integrated as part of a holistic treatment approach. Scheduled BFC patient follow-ups, ethical hand-offs or referrals were considered important for majority of survey respondents based on comfort-level with biblical counseling and perceived relapse potential. Spiritual growth and maintenance, medication management, and individual psychotherapy were recommended by survey respondents. There were contrasts in BFC and non-R/S provider perspectives on pertinent mental health history and inferences from the case. Significant information for patient support included symptoms and confirmatory diagnosis, medical comorbidities, relevant childhood issues, faith-health beliefs, family history and genetics, medication and therapy adherence, and substance use. Faith-health belief congruence of providers with BFC patients and ethical decision-making should be considered. Graduate Medical Education (GME) and other health professional programs may incorporate these considerations, existing R/S interventions, and multidisciplinary provider scope of practice as options for clinician training. Future research steps should include growing the body of anecdotal case reports, evidence-based case series and implementation science studies across a broader range of mental disorders. \\n \",\"PeriodicalId\":52275,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Christian Journal for Global Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Christian Journal for Global Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15566/cjgh.v11i1.845\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Christian Journal for Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15566/cjgh.v11i1.845","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:宗教/精神(R/S)护理通常是心理健康服务对象所希望得到的文化敏感性高、以患者为中心的治疗;然而,服务提供者可能会犹豫不决或忽视这一需求,而且治疗指南也很有限。这项定性研究的目的是探讨现有的 R/S 护理,以及选择 BFC 的患者会考虑哪些支持性护理的观点。这是一个项目的一部分,该项目旨在通过合作,在资源有限的美国高收入国家(HIC)和非洲中低收入国家(LMIC)的社区中推广基于人口的心理保健服务。 方法:先进行定性文献综述,然后进行在线调查,通过滚雪球的方式招募了 54 名多学科参与者。调查参与者被要求回顾一个由 BFC 提供者描述的案例,并匿名回答开放式问卷。通过定性编码和主题分析对收集到的数据进行提炼。 结果:文献综述确定了多学科卫生专业人员提供的 R/S、医疗和/或心理干预作为单一疗法或综合策略。有关医学教育指南的文献很少。定性主题包括是否愿意为 BFC 客户协调护理、应提供何种程度的护理以及对 BFC 疗效的看法。作为整体治疗方法的一部分,R/S 护理通常被整合在一起。基于对圣经咨询的舒适度以及对复发可能性的认识,大多数调查对象都认为定期的圣经咨询病人随访、伦理移交或转诊非常重要。精神成长和维持、药物管理和个人心理治疗是调查对象推荐的治疗方法。对于相关的心理健康病史和病例推断,BFC 和非 R/S 提供者的观点截然不同。为患者提供支持的重要信息包括症状和确诊、并发症、相关的童年问题、信仰-健康信念、家族史和遗传学、药物和治疗的依从性以及药物使用。应考虑医疗服务提供者与 BFC 患者的信仰-健康信念一致性以及伦理决策。医学研究生教育(GME)和其他健康专业课程可将这些考虑因素、现有的 R/S 干预措施和多学科医疗服务提供者的执业范围作为临床医师培训的备选方案。未来的研究步骤应包括增加轶事病例报告、循证病例系列和实施科学研究的数量,涵盖更广泛的精神障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Multidisciplinary Perceptions and Considerations for Spiritual Care and Biblical Framework Counseling in Mental Health
Background: Religious/Spiritual (R/S) care is often desirable by mental health clients for culturally sensitive, patient-focused treatment; yet providers may experience hesitancy or overlook this need and treatment guidelines are limited. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore existing R/S care, as well as perspectives on what support care would be considered for patients choosing BFC. This is part of a project to collaboratively extend population-based mental health care access in resource–constrained communities of both the US, a High-Income Country (HIC) and Low-to-Middle Income Countries (LMICs) in Africa.    Methods: A qualitative literature synthesis, then an online survey was conducted with 54 multidisciplinary participants recruited via snowballing. Survey participants were asked to review a case as described by a BFC provider and respond  anonymously to an open-ended questionnaire. The data collected was distilled with qualitative coding and thematic analysis.    Results: Literature synthesis identified multidisciplinary health professional provision of R/S, medical and/or psychological interventions as monotherapy or integrated strategies. There was a paucity of medical education guidelines. Qualitative themes included willingness to coordinate care for BFC clients, to what capacity should care be provided, and perceptions of BFC efficacy. R/S care was often integrated as part of a holistic treatment approach. Scheduled BFC patient follow-ups, ethical hand-offs or referrals were considered important for majority of survey respondents based on comfort-level with biblical counseling and perceived relapse potential. Spiritual growth and maintenance, medication management, and individual psychotherapy were recommended by survey respondents. There were contrasts in BFC and non-R/S provider perspectives on pertinent mental health history and inferences from the case. Significant information for patient support included symptoms and confirmatory diagnosis, medical comorbidities, relevant childhood issues, faith-health beliefs, family history and genetics, medication and therapy adherence, and substance use. Faith-health belief congruence of providers with BFC patients and ethical decision-making should be considered. Graduate Medical Education (GME) and other health professional programs may incorporate these considerations, existing R/S interventions, and multidisciplinary provider scope of practice as options for clinician training. Future research steps should include growing the body of anecdotal case reports, evidence-based case series and implementation science studies across a broader range of mental disorders.  
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Christian Journal for Global Health
Christian Journal for Global Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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