Suppr超能文献

在临床实践中采集灵性史:工具的系统评价。

Taking spiritual history in clinical practice: a systematic review of instruments.

机构信息

Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, Brazil.

出版信息

Explore (NY). 2013 May-Jun;9(3):159-70. doi: 10.1016/j.explore.2013.02.004.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

To facilitate the addressing of spirituality in clinical practice, several authors have created instruments for obtaining a spiritual history. However, in only a few studies have authors compared these instruments. The aim of this study was to compare the most commonly used instruments for taking a spiritual history in a clinical setting.

METHODS

A systematic review of spiritual history assessment was conducted in five stages: identification of instruments used in the literature (databases searching); relevant articles from title and initial abstract review; exclusion and Inclusion criteria; full text retrieval and final analysis of each instrument.

RESULTS

A total of 2,641 articles were retrieved and after the analysis, 25 instruments were included. The authors independently evaluated each instrument on 16 different aspects. The instruments with the greatest scores in the final analysis were FICA, SPIRITual History, FAITH, HOPE, and the Royal College of Psychiatrists. Concerning all 25 instruments, 20 of 25 inquire about the influence of spirituality on a person's life and 17 address religious coping. Nevertheless, only four inquire about medical practices not allowed, six deal with terminal events, nine have mnemonics to facilitate their use, and five were validated.

CONCLUSIONS

FICA, SPIRITual History, FAITH, HOPE, and Royal College of Psychiatrists scored higher in our analysis. The use of each instrument must be individualized, according to the professional reality, time available, patient profile, and settings.

摘要

背景

为了在临床实践中便于处理灵性问题,有几位作者创建了获取精神病史的工具。然而,仅有少数研究比较了这些工具。本研究旨在比较临床环境中最常用的获取精神病史的工具。

方法

通过五个阶段对精神病史评估工具进行了系统回顾:在文献中确定使用的工具(数据库搜索);从标题和初始摘要审查中获取相关文章;排除和纳入标准;全文检索和对每个工具的最终分析。

结果

共检索到 2641 篇文章,经过分析,共纳入 25 种工具。作者对每个工具的 16 个不同方面进行了独立评估。在最终分析中得分最高的工具是 FICA、SPIRITual History、FAITH、HOPE 和皇家精神病学院。关于所有 25 种工具,25 种中有 20 种询问了灵性对个人生活的影响,17 种涉及宗教应对方式。然而,仅有 4 种询问了不允许的医疗实践,6 种处理临终事件,9 种有便于使用的记忆辅助工具,5 种经过验证。

结论

FICA、SPIRITual History、FAITH、HOPE 和皇家精神病学院在我们的分析中得分更高。每个工具的使用必须根据专业实际情况、可用时间、患者特征和环境进行个体化。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验