4.4 Article

Mental health problems and medically unexplained physical symptoms in adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse: an integrative literature review

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2850.2011.01772.x

关键词

adult survivors of abuse; health services delivery; mental health; primary care; stigma

资金

  1. The Scottish Executive: National Programme for Improving Mental Health and Well-Being: Research Small Projects Initiative

向作者/读者索取更多资源

People sexually abused in childhood are at higher risk than non-abused people of medically unexplained symptoms such as irritable bowel syndrome or chronic pain, with mental ill health and high healthcare use. Friction and frustration, with high, unproductive healthcare costs, can often develop between these patients and healthcare professionals such as general practitioners and nursing staff. The aim of this integrative literature review was to seek a sound evidence base from which to develop helpful interventions, improve relationships and identify gaps in knowledge. It found some theories about interconnections among childhood sexual abuse mental health and medically unexplained symptoms, such as 'somatization' or 'secondary gain', were used prejudicially, stigmatizing survivors. Conflicting theories make more difficult the search for effective interventions. Researchers rarely collaborated with sexual abuse specialists. Emphasis on identifying key risk factors, rather than providing support or alleviating distress, and lack of studies where survivors voiced their own experiences, meant very few targeted interventions for this group were proposed. Recommendations to enable effective interventions include making abuse survivors the prime study focus; qualitative research with survivors, to assist doctors and nursing staff with sensitive care; case histories using medical records; prospective studies with sexually abused children; support for the growing field of neurobiological research.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据