de Diego-Cordero Rocío, Suárez-Reina Paola, Badanta Bárbara, Lucchetti Giancarlo, Vega-Escaño Juan
Faculty of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Podiatry, University of Seville, Seville, Spain.
Faculty of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Podiatry, University of Seville, Seville, Spain.
Appl Nurs Res. 2022 Oct;67:151618. doi: 10.1016/j.apnr.2022.151618. Epub 2022 Jul 16.
Spiritual interventions have proved to alleviate suffering, help the patient to prepare for end of life issues, improve quality of life, and well-being.
This study aims to investigate the efficacy of religious and spiritual interventions in nursing care to promote mental, physical and spiritual health as compared to control groups not receiving such care.
This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials from SCOPUS, PUBMED, Web of Science and CINAHL databases. The searches were carried out between May and July 2020 without restrictions concerning the date of publication. Peer-reviewed articles published in English, Portuguese or Spanish, focusing on nurses were included. This study followed the PRISMA guidelines. In addition, the CONSORT and The Cochrane Collaborations tool for assessing risk of bias were followed.
The search process identified 1308 publications, 18 randomized controlled trials were included for the systematic review and 9 for the meta-analysis. The meta-analyses revealed that spiritual interventions were associated with lower mental health symptoms (SMD = -6.91 [-9.83,-3.98], p < 0.001, I2 = 99 %), greater well-being (SMD = 1.26 [0.58, 1.93], p < 0.001, I2 = 94 %) and higher levels of spirituality (SMD = 0.48 [0.29, 0.67], p < 0.001, I2 = 31 %) as compared to individuals in the control group.
Spiritual interventions seem to be effective to promote health, as seen for mental health, spirituality, well-being and physical outcomes. Nevertheless, more than half of the studies have a high risk of bias in any of the dimensions evaluated and there is an important heterogeneity among interventions and outcomes. This is particularly important to nurses and nurse managers who want to provide a holistic care to their patients.
事实证明,精神干预措施能够减轻痛苦,帮助患者为临终事宜做好准备,提高生活质量和幸福感。
本研究旨在调查与未接受此类护理的对照组相比,宗教和精神干预措施在护理中促进心理、身体和精神健康方面的疗效。
这是一项对来自SCOPUS、PUBMED、科学网和CINAHL数据库的临床试验进行的系统评价和荟萃分析。检索在2020年5月至7月期间进行,对出版日期没有限制。纳入了以护士为重点、以英文、葡萄牙文或西班牙文发表的同行评审文章。本研究遵循PRISMA指南。此外,还遵循了CONSORT和Cochrane协作组评估偏倚风险的工具。
检索过程共识别出1308篇出版物,其中18项随机对照试验纳入系统评价,9项纳入荟萃分析。荟萃分析显示,与对照组个体相比,精神干预与较低的心理健康症状(标准化均数差= -6.91 [-9.83, -3.98],p < 0.001,I² = 99%)、更高的幸福感(标准化均数差= 1.26 [0.58, 1.93],p < 0.001,I² = 94%)和更高的精神水平(标准化均数差= 0.48 [0.29, 0.67],p < 0.001,I² = 31%)相关。
精神干预措施似乎对促进健康有效,在心理健康、精神、幸福感和身体结果方面均有体现。然而,超过一半的研究在任何评估维度上都存在较高的偏倚风险,并且干预措施和结果之间存在重要的异质性。这对于希望为患者提供整体护理的护士和护士长来说尤为重要。