The Theory of Bureaucratic Caring’s Examination of Psychological Debriefing

George Eistetter
{"title":"The Theory of Bureaucratic Caring’s Examination of Psychological Debriefing","authors":"George Eistetter","doi":"10.20467/IJHC-2021-0026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The use of psychological debriefing (PD) to stave off the symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has long been a controversial topic, hampered by the lack of congruent empirical evidence. This issue, PD within a healthcare setting, will be examined utilizing aspects of the theory of bureaucratic caring. Current findings suggest the popularity and recommendation of PD among the administrative staff of hospitals and individual employees but this is in direct contrast with numerous authors and global health governing bodies who discredit implementation. Overall, support for PD is not substantive, and implementation may increase the prevalence of PTSD among its participants. This dire consequence may, in turn, increase the economic and political burden of the healthcare system and poor health outcomes for participants. Awareness of the conflicting research may offer perspectives on (a) best practice standards, (b) the allocation of mental health resources, and (c) the creation of quality practice environments.","PeriodicalId":92527,"journal":{"name":"International journal for human caring","volume":"32 1","pages":"167 - 171"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal for human caring","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20467/IJHC-2021-0026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The use of psychological debriefing (PD) to stave off the symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has long been a controversial topic, hampered by the lack of congruent empirical evidence. This issue, PD within a healthcare setting, will be examined utilizing aspects of the theory of bureaucratic caring. Current findings suggest the popularity and recommendation of PD among the administrative staff of hospitals and individual employees but this is in direct contrast with numerous authors and global health governing bodies who discredit implementation. Overall, support for PD is not substantive, and implementation may increase the prevalence of PTSD among its participants. This dire consequence may, in turn, increase the economic and political burden of the healthcare system and poor health outcomes for participants. Awareness of the conflicting research may offer perspectives on (a) best practice standards, (b) the allocation of mental health resources, and (c) the creation of quality practice environments.
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
官僚关怀理论对心理述职的检验
长期以来,由于缺乏一致的经验证据,使用心理汇报(PD)来延缓创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)的症状一直是一个有争议的话题。这个问题,PD在医疗保健设置,将检查利用方面的官僚关怀理论。目前的研究结果表明,PD在医院管理人员和个人雇员中受到欢迎和推荐,但这与许多作者和全球卫生管理机构的实施持怀疑态度形成鲜明对比。总的来说,对PD的支持不是实质性的,实施可能会增加参与者中PTSD的患病率。这种可怕的后果可能反过来增加医疗保健系统的经济和政治负担,以及参与者的不良健康结果。认识到相互矛盾的研究可能会对(a)最佳实践标准、(b)精神卫生资源的分配以及(c)创造高质量的实践环境提供观点。
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
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Nursing Students’ Perspectives on Caring Pedagogical Relationship Within the Context of Simulation: A Phenomenological Inquiry Concept of Love in Nursing Based on the Iranian View: Love, True Meaning, or Virtual? Compassion Without Fatigue. A Unitary Caring Science Approach: Part II—Essential Truths of Compassion Fatigue for Pediatric Nurses Caring Praxis: Responding to Persons Experiencing Opioid Use Disorder A Historical and Empirical Review of Compassion
×
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