Religiosity and Spirituality of Resident Physicians and Implications for Clinical Practice-the SBRAMER Multicenter Study
Religiosity and Spirituality of Resident Physicians and Implications for Clinical Practice-the SBRAMER Multicenter Study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s11606-020-06145-x
复制
发表时间：
2020-08-19
影响因子：
5.7
通讯作者：
Lucchetti, Giancarlo
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sena Lomba Vasconcelos, Ana Paula;Granero Lucchetti, Alessandra Lamas;Lucchetti, Giancarlo
目的评估巴西住院医师对宗教信仰/灵性（R/S）的态度、知识和经验、与解决这一问题相关的因素及其对临床实践的影响。方法我们报告了涉及7个巴西大学中心的多中心“巴西住院医生的灵性”（SBRAMER）研究的结果。精神与健康研究网络（NERSH）量表（收集社会人口学数据、关于R/S-健康界面的意见和受访者的R/S特征）和杜克宗教指数是自我管理的。建立Logistic回归模型，分析住院医师对临床实践中精神治疗意见的影响因素。结果879名住院医师（占总人数的53.5%）来自不同年限的住院医师，其中71.6%来自临床专科。尽管不定期参加宗教活动，但总的来说，居民们认为自己有精神和宗教信仰。大多数参与者认为R/S对患者健康有重要影响（75.2%），并且在与患者的临床接触中讨论这些信念是合适的（77.1%），尽管在常规临床实践中没有这样做（14.4%）。讨论R/S的主要障碍是保持专业中立（31.4%）、担心冒犯患者（29.1%）和时间不足（26.2%）。女性性别、临床专业（如内科、家庭医学、精神病学）而非外科专业（如外科、产科/妇科、骨科）、接受过R/S方面的正式培训以及R/S水平较高的因素与更多关于R/S的讨论和更积极的看法有关。结论巴西住院医师认为宗教和精神信仰可以影响健康，认为医生应该讨论这个问题。然而，缺乏培训是临床实践中解决R/S问题的主要障碍之一。教育工作者应该利用这些数据来进行干预，并在住院医师项目中制作有关主题的内容。
Objectives To assess the attitudes, knowledge, and experiences of Brazilian resident physicians regarding religiosity/spirituality (R/S), factors associated with addressing this issue, and its influence on clinical practice. Methods We report results of the multicenter "Spirituality in Brazilian Medical Residents" (SBRAMER) study involving 7 Brazilian university centers. The Network for Research Spirituality and Health (NERSH) scale (collecting sociodemographic data, opinions about the R/S-health interface, and respondents' R/S characteristics) and the Duke Religion Index were self-administered. Logistic regression models were constructed to determine those factors associated with residents' opinions on spirituality in clinical practice. Results The sample comprised 879 resident physicians (53.5% of total) from all years of residency with 71.6% from clinical specialties. In general, the residents considered themselves spiritual and religious, despite not regularly attending religious services. Most participants believed R/S had an important influence on patient health (75.2%) and that it was appropriate to discuss these beliefs in clinical encounters with patients (77.1%), although this was not done in routine clinical practice (14.4%). The main barriers to discussing R/S were maintaining professional neutrality (31.4%), concern about offending patients (29.1%), and insufficient time (26.2%). Factors including female gender, clinical specialty (e.g., internal medicine, family medicine, psychiatry) as opposed to surgical specialty (e.g., surgery, obstetrics/gynecology, orthopedics), having had formal training on R/S, and higher levels of R/S were associated with greater discussion of and more positive opinions about R/S. Conclusion Brazilian resident physicians held that religious and spiritual beliefs can influence health, and deemed it appropriate for physicians to discuss this issue. However, lack of training was one of the main obstacles to addressing R/S issues in clinical practice. Educators should draw on these data to conduct interventions and produce content on the subject in residency programs.