Client-Centered, Person-Centered, and Resilience-Based Approaches to Trauma-Informed Care
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Chapter three explores client-centered, person-centered, and resiliencefocussed approaches to trauma-informed care, and although they differ somewhat, all three are strength-based and share the common goal of helping people who have experienced adversity. Client-centered care places the person and their capacity for growth and change at the heart of all that occurs. This approach prioritizes respect for the self-worth of every human being and promotes the practice of unconditional positive regard. The quality of the therapeutic relationship between the nurse and client/patient is important, as is the nurse’s ability to apply professional knowledge and competence to the care they provide. A unique aspect of person-centered care is that it provides services to people with acute and chronic health issues that are holistic, and recovery-orientated. Collaboration and effective communication skills are essential features of this approach. Positive ways to offer person-centered care to people from these populations are reviewed, the elderly, those with a disability, people with dementia, palliative care patients, and persons suffering from mental illness and substance use. Specific components of recovery-oriented care that are included in the discussion are a person’s capacity for change and courage, their responsibility for their growth, and the importance of finding purpose in their lives. Resilience is identified as the is the ability to carry on and bounce back to original functioning after experiencing a trauma. We are made aware that a resilient person becomes stronger despite adversity because they utilize positive emotions, develop a sturdy mindset, a renewed commitment to life, and welcome challenges. The remainder of the discussion focuses on how to safely conduct screening for trauma for everyone including survivors of interpersonal violence (IPV). Two Narrative Case Studies are presented. The first one demonstrates that when a client/patient crosses a professional boundary, a problem is created for the nurse. The second Case Study explores how a survivor of interpersonal violence (IPV) may require advocacy to help them stay safe. The following four learning activities are recommended, how to practice unconditional positive regard; exploring helpful strategies to utilize when conducting trauma screening; dispelling myths associated with IPV; and how to implement survivor-centered approaches when caring for someone who has experienced IPV. At the end of the Chapter, a self-care strategy is recommended that challenges nurses to set aside time to focus more on being present.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,008 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,010 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,009 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,008 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».