Effectiveness of psychological first aid in infectious disease pandemics: An overview of systematic reviews.

PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences Pub Date : 2023-06-08 eCollection Date: 2023-06-01 DOI:10.1002/pcn5.107
Masahide Koda, Toru Horinouchi, Nozomu Oya, Morio Aki, Akihisa Iriki, Kazufumi Yoshida, Yusuke Ogawa, Hironori Kuga, Tomohiro Nakao
{"title":"Effectiveness of psychological first aid in infectious disease pandemics: An overview of systematic reviews.","authors":"Masahide Koda, Toru Horinouchi, Nozomu Oya, Morio Aki, Akihisa Iriki, Kazufumi Yoshida, Yusuke Ogawa, Hironori Kuga, Tomohiro Nakao","doi":"10.1002/pcn5.107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There is insufficient research on the usefulness of psychological interventions, such as psychological first aid (PFA), during outbreaks. We searched for and critically appraised systematic reviews that examined the effectiveness of PFA during infectious disease outbreaks, such as the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Systematic reviews that examined the efficacy of PFA in the severe acute respiratory syndrome, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, Ebola virus disease, and COVID-19 outbreaks were searched through PubMed on February 19, 2021. The three included systematic reviews were critically appraised and assessed using AMSTAR-2. One review's overall confidence in its findings was evaluated as \"high,\" which suggested that PFA training had a favorable effect on healthcare personnel. Furthermore, the review also demonstrated that PFA was commonly used during outbreaks and could be delivered through multiple methods, such as a phone or video call. Although it was anticipated that PFA would improve subjective well-being, reports showed no evidence of reduced depression or insomnia. Future studies should examine additional numbers of PFA recipients and conduct quasi-experimental studies to better understand the effectiveness of PFA. Evidence on its effectiveness in infectious disease outbreaks is still lacking, along with research and evaluation methods. Quasi-experimental studies, such as comparisons with other psychological interventions, are required to better understand the effectiveness of PFA.</p>","PeriodicalId":74405,"journal":{"name":"PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences","volume":" ","pages":"e107"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11114278/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pcn5.107","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There is insufficient research on the usefulness of psychological interventions, such as psychological first aid (PFA), during outbreaks. We searched for and critically appraised systematic reviews that examined the effectiveness of PFA during infectious disease outbreaks, such as the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Systematic reviews that examined the efficacy of PFA in the severe acute respiratory syndrome, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, Ebola virus disease, and COVID-19 outbreaks were searched through PubMed on February 19, 2021. The three included systematic reviews were critically appraised and assessed using AMSTAR-2. One review's overall confidence in its findings was evaluated as "high," which suggested that PFA training had a favorable effect on healthcare personnel. Furthermore, the review also demonstrated that PFA was commonly used during outbreaks and could be delivered through multiple methods, such as a phone or video call. Although it was anticipated that PFA would improve subjective well-being, reports showed no evidence of reduced depression or insomnia. Future studies should examine additional numbers of PFA recipients and conduct quasi-experimental studies to better understand the effectiveness of PFA. Evidence on its effectiveness in infectious disease outbreaks is still lacking, along with research and evaluation methods. Quasi-experimental studies, such as comparisons with other psychological interventions, are required to better understand the effectiveness of PFA.

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
传染病大流行中心理急救的有效性:系统综述
目前还没有充分的研究表明在疾病暴发期间心理干预措施(如心理急救 (PFA))是有用的。我们搜索并严格评估了研究新型冠状病毒病(COVID-19)等传染病爆发期间心理急救有效性的系统性综述。2021 年 2 月 19 日,我们在 PubMed 上检索了研究 PFA 在严重急性呼吸系统综合征、中东呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒、埃博拉病毒病和 COVID-19 爆发时有效性的系统性综述。使用 AMSTAR-2 对纳入的三篇系统性综述进行了严格鉴定和评估。其中一篇综述对其研究结果的总体置信度被评定为 "高",这表明 PFA 培训对医护人员产生了有利影响。此外,该综述还表明,PFA 通常在疾病爆发时使用,并可通过电话或视频通话等多种方式提供。尽管预计 PFA 将改善主观幸福感,但报告显示没有证据表明抑郁症或失眠症有所减轻。未来的研究应检查更多的 PFA 接受者,并进行准实验研究,以更好地了解 PFA 的有效性。目前仍缺乏有关其对传染病爆发的有效性的证据,也缺乏研究和评估方法。为了更好地了解 PFA 的有效性,需要进行准实验研究,例如与其他心理干预措施进行比较。
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
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Adherence to outpatient care among individuals with pre-existing psychiatric disorders following the 2024 Noto Peninsula Earthquake: A retrospective study. Middle-aged man with primary hyperparathyroidism-associated psychosis: A case report. Launching a child and adolescent psychiatry training program in Mongolia inspired by Japanese models. Long-term mental health crisis among municipal public employees caused by the Fukushima nuclear accident and subsequent disasters: Questionnaire survey 10 years postdisaster. Pivotal role of venous blood gas analysis in the detection of metabolic acidosis due to laxative abuse in an anorexia nervosa patient: A case report.
×
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