{"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":"4 2","pages":""},"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\":\"4 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"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}
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.