In recent years, there has been an exponential increase in studies demonstrating the positive effects of the religiosity/spirituality (R/S) approach on patients’ physical and mental health. In mental health units, patients want professionals to be sensitive to their spiritual and/or religious needs, which is a fundamental aspect of a holistic approach to patients. Qualitative research with an exploratory and descriptive design with an ethnographic-phenomenological approach through in-depth interviews with sixteen professionals from Spanish mental health units. There is no consensus on the definition of spirituality; however, all of them believe that R/S has a positive influence on the health of patients in coping with illness. They believe that their own R/S may interfere with the professional–patient relationship and their attention to spiritual needs. Few professionals address these needs, citing limitations such as lack of time and lack of specific training in spiritual care. More research is needed on the spiritual care of mental health professionals to define the framework, professional training, and associated challenges in the spiritual care of patients.

Introduction: It is becoming increasingly important to address the spiritual dimension in the integral care of the people in order to adequately assist them in the processes of their illness and healing. Considering the spiritual dimension has an ethical basis because it attends to the values and spiritual needs of the person in clinical decision-making, as well as helping them cope with their illness. Doctors, although sensitive to this fact, approach spiritual care in clinical practice with little rigour due to certain facts, factors, and boundaries that are assessed in this review. Objective: To find out how doctors approach the spiritual dimension, describing its characteristics, the factors that influence it, and the limitations they encounter. Methodology: We conducted a review of the scientific literature to date in the PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL databases of randomised and non-randomised controlled trials, observational studies, and qualitative studies written in Spanish, English, and Portuguese on the spiritual approach adopted by doctors in clinical practice. This review consisted of several phases: (i) the exclusion of duplicate records; (ii) the reading of titles and abstracts; (iii) the assessment of full articles and their methodological quality using the guidelines of the international Equator Network. Results: A total of 1414 publications were identified in the search, 373 of which were excluded for being off-topic or repeated in databases. Of the remaining 1041, 962 were excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria. After initial screening, 79 articles were selected, from which 17 were collected after reading the full text. A total of 8 studies were eligible for inclusion. There were three qualitative studies and five cross-sectional observational studies with sufficient methodological quality. The results showed the perspectives and principal characteristics identified by doctors in their approach to the spiritual dimension, with lack of training, a lack of time, and fear in addressing this dimension in the clinic the main findings. Conclusions: Although more and more scientific research is demonstrating the benefits of spiritual care in clinical practice and physicians are aware of it, efforts are needed to achieve true holistic care in which specific training in spiritual care plays a key role.

Background: Given the global concern about mental health in the world, different approaches are being explored in its approach and treatment. In this line, the care of the spiritual dimension has been shown in many studies to have a significantly positive relationship. In mental health units, the comprehensive approach that involves comprehensive care considers the spiritual dimension as an aspect of care that contributes to coping with mental health problems. Methods: This is qualitative research with a descriptive design and an ethnographic approach, using interviews with forty-five professionals from Spanish and Portuguese mental health units. Results: The professionals do not define the term spiritual health in the same way; however, all interviewees believe that S/R positively influences the mental health of their patients, although few address it. They believe that their own S/R can influence their attention to spiritual needs. Among the limitations are the lack of training and time due to the prevailing biomedical model. Lack of time and specific training in spiritual care are the main aspects to which they attribute the shortage in meeting spiritual needs. Most of them expressed feeling challenged to care for the spiritual dimension after this research. Conclusions: More studies are needed on the spiritual care provided by mental health professionals to specify specific training and the associated challenges in this field.

Desde los albores de la historia, la ciencia y la creencia están destinadas a un diálogo permanente, puesto que ambas están centradas en el ser humano, que trata de asignar sentido y significado a los acontecimientos que suceden, tanto a los que le ocurren a sí mismo, como a los que acontecen a su alrededor. Considerando esta estrecha relación, se pretende con este artículo realizar una reflexión acerca de cómo las creencias pueden ser contempladas como determinantes para la salud de igual modo que lo son otro tipo de factores psicológicos o sociales como la cultura o el ambiente. Se interpela a ello mediante una reflexión fundamentada en las consideraciones de autores como Cassell o Frankl, y en investigaciones científicas relevantes que han demostrado de manera fehaciente el impacto positivo que las creencias tienen sobre la salud.

In this study, we investigate the health problems and the use of medications and traditional therapies among Chinese immigrants in the Southern region of Spain. A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews and including 133 immigrants and 7 stakeholders was conducted in 2017. Transcription, literal reading, and theoretical categorization were performed, and a narrative content analysis was carried out. The most common health problems were musculoskeletal (28.6%) and allergies (25.6%) related to work activity and unhealthy lifestyles. Key informants also reported gastric problems, stress, and changes in eating habits, mostly related to their work activity. For these problems, a large number of traditional remedies (herbs, diet therapy, acupuncture, vitamins, etc.) were used, usually combined with pharmaceutical drugs used for colds, flu, general malaise (29%), pain and fever (23%), and allergy drugs (9.2%). Chinese immigrants reported health conditions associated with their working conditions and life habits in Spain, using Traditional Chinese Medicine instead of pharmacological drugs. Understanding these health problems and promoting awareness towards traditional therapies in the healthcare system may help to design public policies and Health Promotion strategies targeting this group.

Background/Objectives: Between 20 and 30% of the global population experiences Chronic Pain (CP). A comprehensive, interdisciplinary approach incorporating non-pharmacological interventions and active patient participation is recommended. This study evaluated the short- and medium-term effectiveness of a multicomponent workshop compared with a control group. Methods: A detailed description of the workshop and a single-group before–after evaluation in 197 patients were recently published. The present study used a quasi-experimental before–after design with a three-month follow-up, comparing an intervention group (n = 64) with a contemporaneous control group that continued with usual care (n = 64). Validated scales were used to measure pain, well-being, quality of life (QoL), self-esteem, resilience, anxiety, and depression. Two ad hoc surveys assessed satisfaction and perceived impact on pain, medication use, habits, and mood. Results: A total of 128 patients participated (64 per group). The intervention group showed statistically significant improvements in all indicators at both short-term (end of workshop) and medium-term (three months) follow-up. Pain decreased by −1.3 (−3.0–0) [3 months: −1.0 (−3.0–−1.0)], anxiety by −3.0 (−5.0–−1.0) [3 months: −3.0 (−5.0–1.0)], and depression by −4.0 (−7.0–−2.0) [3 months: −3.0 (−6.0–0)]. Well-being increased by 3.0 (1.0–4.0) [3 months: 1.0 (0–4.0)]; QoL by 0.213 (0.072–0.388) [3 months: 0.185 (0.013–0.337)]; perceived health by 13.5 (0–30.0) [3 months: 10.0 (0–30.0)]; self-esteem by 4.5 (1.0–7.3) [3 months: 3.0 (−1.0–6.0)], and resilience by 1.0 (−1.0–5.0) [3 months: 1.0 (0.0–5.0)]. In the control group, resilience worsened (−1.0 [−5.0–1.0], p = 0.002) and depression increased (1.0 [−1.0–3.0], p = 0.037). Pain decreased in 47 participants (74.6%) at the end of the workshop [3 months: 34 (65.4%)]. Of 55 who used medication, 48 (81.4%) reduced their intake [3 months: 34; 68.0%]. Healthy habits improved in 58 (92.1%) [3 months: 40; 78.4%]. Mood improved: 26 (41.3%) described themselves as “cheerful” and 24 (38.1%) as “neutral” [3 months: 23; 44.2% and 14; 26.9%]. Overall satisfaction: 9.7 (scale 0–10). Conclusions: The workshop enabled patients to mitigate pain, actively participate in self-care, and improve quality of life, self-esteem, and emotional well-being. These effects persisted three months post-intervention.