Characteristics of natural environment use by occupational therapists working in mental health care: a scoping review.

IF 1.5 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES JBI evidence synthesis Pub Date : 2024-09-19 DOI:10.11124/JBIES-23-00437
Ruth Bishop, Frazer Underwood, Fiona Fraser, Lisa Burrows, Jill Shawe
{"title":"Characteristics of natural environment use by occupational therapists working in mental health care: a scoping review.","authors":"Ruth Bishop, Frazer Underwood, Fiona Fraser, Lisa Burrows, Jill Shawe","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00437","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this review was to identify and characterize the use of the natural environment/outdoor space by occupational therapists working in mental health care. This included consideration of the characteristics of the environment used, interventions, mental health conditions being treated, and the outcomes being used.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Research has demonstrated the link between human health and the environment. The benefits appear to be particularly relevant to people with mental health conditions. Occupational therapists already consider the environment when assessing and developing interventions, and therefore are well placed to consider and use the natural environment in mental health practice. However, the use of the natural environment by occupational therapists working in mental health is unclear.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>The scoping review included any publication relating to the use of the natural environment/outdoor space in mental health occupational therapy practice. All forms of the natural environment or outdoor space were included, such as hospital gardens and local parks. There were no geographical, gender, or age restrictions. All mental health diagnoses were eligible for inclusion.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seven databases were searched: Embase (Ovid), Emcare (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO (ProQuest), AMED (Ovid), Trip Database, and CINAHL (EBSCOhost). Gray literature was also searched using a selection of websites and digital repositories. Papers written in English were searched, with no time limit set on publication. Titles and abstracts were screened by 2 independent reviewers for assessment against the inclusion criteria, followed by a full-text review and data extraction. Data were extracted using the data extraction tool developed by the authors. Findings were presented in a tabular format, accompanied by a narrative summary describing how the results relate to the review objectives and question.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of peer-reviewed publications, 7 papers used qualitative methods and 7 used mixed methodology. The remaining sources included conference abstracts, unpublished works, a book chapter, and a website article. The environments used included forests, beaches, gardens, and parks. A variety of interventions were delivered in these environments, including gardening and nature-based activities, physical activities, and animal-assisted interventions. Such activity-focused interventions are largely delivered in a group context, thus providing a social element. A diverse range of mental health conditions were treated. Several methods were used to consider the outcomes on the individual, including both qualitative measures and quantitative outcome measurement tools.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The review highlights many characteristics of how the natural environment is being used across mental health services by occupational therapists. A variety of conditions are targeted for such interventions, and several outcome measures have been used to understand impact. This review can support further development and implementation of nature-based approaches in mental health occupational therapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBI evidence synthesis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-23-00437","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this review was to identify and characterize the use of the natural environment/outdoor space by occupational therapists working in mental health care. This included consideration of the characteristics of the environment used, interventions, mental health conditions being treated, and the outcomes being used.

Introduction: Research has demonstrated the link between human health and the environment. The benefits appear to be particularly relevant to people with mental health conditions. Occupational therapists already consider the environment when assessing and developing interventions, and therefore are well placed to consider and use the natural environment in mental health practice. However, the use of the natural environment by occupational therapists working in mental health is unclear.

Inclusion criteria: The scoping review included any publication relating to the use of the natural environment/outdoor space in mental health occupational therapy practice. All forms of the natural environment or outdoor space were included, such as hospital gardens and local parks. There were no geographical, gender, or age restrictions. All mental health diagnoses were eligible for inclusion.

Methods: Seven databases were searched: Embase (Ovid), Emcare (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO (ProQuest), AMED (Ovid), Trip Database, and CINAHL (EBSCOhost). Gray literature was also searched using a selection of websites and digital repositories. Papers written in English were searched, with no time limit set on publication. Titles and abstracts were screened by 2 independent reviewers for assessment against the inclusion criteria, followed by a full-text review and data extraction. Data were extracted using the data extraction tool developed by the authors. Findings were presented in a tabular format, accompanied by a narrative summary describing how the results relate to the review objectives and question.

Results: Of peer-reviewed publications, 7 papers used qualitative methods and 7 used mixed methodology. The remaining sources included conference abstracts, unpublished works, a book chapter, and a website article. The environments used included forests, beaches, gardens, and parks. A variety of interventions were delivered in these environments, including gardening and nature-based activities, physical activities, and animal-assisted interventions. Such activity-focused interventions are largely delivered in a group context, thus providing a social element. A diverse range of mental health conditions were treated. Several methods were used to consider the outcomes on the individual, including both qualitative measures and quantitative outcome measurement tools.

Conclusions: The review highlights many characteristics of how the natural environment is being used across mental health services by occupational therapists. A variety of conditions are targeted for such interventions, and several outcome measures have been used to understand impact. This review can support further development and implementation of nature-based approaches in mental health occupational therapy.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从事心理健康护理工作的职业治疗师使用自然环境的特点:范围界定综述。
目的:本综述旨在确定和描述从事心理健康护理工作的职业治疗师对自然环境/户外空间的使用情况。这包括考虑所使用环境的特点、干预措施、所治疗的精神健康状况以及所使用的结果:研究表明,人类健康与环境息息相关。这些益处似乎与精神疾病患者尤为相关。职业治疗师在评估和制定干预措施时已经考虑到了环境问题,因此他们完全有能力在心理健康实践中考虑和利用自然环境。然而,从事心理健康工作的职业治疗师对自然环境的使用情况尚不清楚:范围界定审查包括与在心理健康职业治疗实践中使用自然环境/户外空间有关的任何出版物。所有形式的自然环境或户外空间都包括在内,如医院花园和当地公园。没有地域、性别或年龄限制。所有精神健康诊断均符合纳入条件:搜索了七个数据库:Embase(Ovid)、Emcare(Ovid)、MEDLINE(Ovid)、PsycINFO(ProQuest)、AMED(Ovid)、Trip Database 和 CINAHL(EBSCOhost)。此外,还利用部分网站和数字资料库对灰色文献进行了检索。检索的论文以英文撰写,出版时间不受限制。标题和摘要由两名独立审稿人根据纳入标准进行筛选,然后进行全文审阅和数据提取。数据提取使用作者开发的数据提取工具。研究结果以表格形式呈现,并附有叙述性摘要,说明研究结果与综述目标和问题的关系:在经同行评审的出版物中,7 篇论文使用了定性方法,7 篇使用了混合方法。其余来源包括会议摘要、未发表的作品、一本书的章节和一篇网站文章。使用的环境包括森林、海滩、花园和公园。在这些环境中提供了各种干预措施,包括园艺和自然活动、体育活动和动物辅助干预措施。这些以活动为重点的干预措施大多是在集体环境中进行的,因此提供了社交元素。治疗的精神健康状况多种多样。采用了多种方法来考虑对个人的影响,包括定性测量和定量结果测量工具:综述强调了职业治疗师在心理健康服务中使用自然环境的许多特点。这些干预措施针对的病症多种多样,并使用了多种结果测量工具来了解其影响。本综述可为心理健康职业疗法中基于自然的方法的进一步发展和实施提供支持。
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 去求助
来源期刊
JBI evidence synthesis
JBI evidence synthesis Nursing-Nursing (all)
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.70%
发文量
218
期刊最新文献
Value-based outcome evaluation methods used by occupational therapists in primary care: a scoping review. Parents' and guardians' experiences of barriers and facilitators in accessing autism spectrum disorder diagnostic services for their children: a qualitative systematic review. Evidence on the accreditation of health professionals' education in the WHO Africa region: a scoping review protocol. Barriers and facilitators to designing, maintaining, and utilizing rare disease patient registries: a scoping review protocol. Supporting professional practice transition in undergraduate nursing education: a scoping review protocol.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1