Bibliotherapy as a Non-pharmaceutical Intervention to Enhance Mental Health in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review and Bioethical Meta-Analysis.

Background: A non-pharmaceutical treatment offered as psychological support is bibliotherapy, which can be described as the process of reading, reflecting, and discussing literature to further a cognitive shift. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic demands a response to prevent a peak in the prevalence of mental health problems and to avoid the collapse of mental health services, which are scarce and inaccessible due to the pandemic. Thus, this study aimed to review articles on the effectiveness of bibliotherapy on different mental health problems. Methods: A systematic review was conducted to examine relevant studies that assess the effectiveness of bibliotherapy in different clinical settings as a treatment capable of enhancing a sense of purpose and its surrounding values. To achieve this, a systematic review, including a bioethical meta-analysis, was performed. A variant of the PICO (Participants, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome) model was used for the search strategy, and the systematic review was conducted in three databases: PubMed, Bireme, and OVID. Inclusion criteria were relevant studies that included the keywords, excluding documents with irrelevant topics, studies on subjects 15 years or younger, and in languages besides Spanish or English. Starting with 707 studies, after three rounds of different quality criteria, 13 articles were selected for analysis, including a hermeneutic analysis, which was followed by a fourth and final recovery round assessing bibliotherapy articles concerning healthcare workers. Results: Our findings showed that through bibliotherapy, patients developed several capacities, including the re-signification of their own activities through a new outlook of their moral horizon. There are no research road maps serving as guides to conduct research on the use of bibliotherapy to enhance mental health. Additionally, values such as autonomy and justice were closely linked with positive results in bibliotherapy. This implies that bibliotherapy has the potential to have a positive impact in different settings. Conclusions: Our contribution is to offer a road map that presents state-of-the-art bibliotherapy research, which will assist institutions and healthcare professionals to plan clinical and specific interventions with positive outcomes.

Today´s medical self and the other: Challenges and evolving solutions for enhanced humanization and quality of care.

BACKGROUND: Recent scientific developments, along with growing awareness of cultural and social diversity, have led to a continuously growing range of available treatment options; however, such developments occasionally lead to an undesirable imbalance between science, technology and humanism in clinical practice. This study explores the understanding and practice of values and value clusters in real-life clinical settings, as well as their role in the humanization of medicine and its institutions. The research focuses on the values of clinical practice as a means of finding ways to enhance the pairing of Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) with Values-based Medicine (VBM) in daily practice. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The views and representations of clinical practice in 15 pre-CME and 15 post-CME interviews were obtained from a random sampling of active healthcare professionals. These views were then identified and qualitatively analyzed using a three-step hermeneutical approach. A clinical values space was identified in which ethical and epistemic values emerge, grow and develop within the biomedical, ethical, and socio-economic dimensions of everyday health care. Three main values-as well as the dynamic clusters and networks that they tend to form-were recognized: healthcare personnel-patient relationships, empathy, and respect. An examination of the interviews suggested that an adequate conceptualization of values leads to the formation of a wider axiological system. The role of clinician-as-consociate emerged as an ideal for achieving medical excellence. CONCLUSIONS: By showing the intricate clusters and networks into which values are interwoven, our analysis suggests methods for fine-tuning educational interventions so they can lead to demonstrable changes in attitudes and practices.

Promoting networks between evidence-based medicine and values-based medicine in continuing medical education.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, medical practice has followed two different paradigms: evidence-based medicine (EBM) and values-based medicine (VBM). There is an urgent need to promote medical education that strengthens the relationship between these two paradigms. This work is designed to establish the foundations for a continuing medical education (CME) program aimed at encouraging the dialogue between EBM and VBM by determining the values relevant to everyday medical activities. METHODS: A quasi-experimental, observational, comparative, prospective and qualitative study was conducted by analyzing through a concurrent triangulation strategy the correlation between healthcare personnel-patient relationship, healthcare personnel's life history, and ethical judgments regarding dilemmas that arise in daily clinical practice.In 2009, healthcare personnel working in Mexico were invited to participate in a free, online clinical ethics course. Each participant responded to a set of online survey instruments before and after the CME program. Face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted with healthcare personnel, focusing on their views and representations of clinical practice. RESULTS: The healthcare personnel's core values were honesty and respect. There were significant differences in the clinical practice axiology before and after the course (P <0.001); notably, autonomy climbed from the 10th (order mean (OM) = 8.00) to the 3rd position (OM = 5.86). In ethical discernment, the CME program had an impact on autonomy (P ≤0.0001). Utilitarian autonomy was reinforced in the participants (P ≤0.0001). Regarding work values, significant differences due to the CME intervention were found in openness to change (OC) (P <0.000), self-transcendence (ST) (P <0.001), and self-enhancement (SE) (P <0.019). Predominant values in life history, ethical discernment and healthcare personnel-patient relation were beneficence, respect and compassion, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The healthcare personnel participating in a CME intervention in clinical ethics improved high-order values: Openness to change (OC) and Self Transcendence (ST), which are essential to fulfilling the healing ends of medicine. The CME intervention strengthened the role of educators and advisors with respect to healthcare personnel. The ethical values developed by healthcare professionals arise from their life history and their professional formation.