Promoting Mental Health and Wellness in Healthcare Settings: The Role of Clinical Psychology

A special issue of Healthcare (ISSN 2227-9032). This special issue belongs to the section "Mental Health and Psychosocial Well-being".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 31 August 2027 | Viewed by 1991

Editor


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Philosophy, Sociology, Education and Applied Psychology, University of Padova, 35131 Padova, Italy
Interests: health psychology; psychotherapeutic processes; psychology of adolescence; mental illness; school psychology
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The role of clinical psychology in promoting health and well-being in healthcare and psychological services has become increasingly crucial in recent years. Our understanding of health has evolved from a purely biomedical model to a biopsychosocial one (Engel, 1977; Huber, 2011; Larson, 1999), recognizing the interconnection between mind and body, leading to more circular or dialogical definitions of health (Bircher & Kuruvilla, 2014; Turchi & Della Torre, 1997).

Studies within clinical psychology have the potential to offer a unique contribution in this context. Firstly, clinical psychology plays a fundamental role in promoting healthy behaviors (Kaplan, 2000; Taylor, 2018), intervening in various contexts and for different activities, such as smoking cessation, weight management, increasing physical activity, adherence to medical therapies, reducing alcohol consumption, stress management, and improving sleep quality. Through different tools, clinical psychologists help people modify harmful habits, develop effective coping strategies, and improve their overall well-being, adapting interventions to the specific needs of each individual and the community to which they belong.

Furthermore, research in clinical psychology continues to provide evidence on the effectiveness of psychological interventions in various healthcare settings, from oncology to chronic pain management, from psychotropic substance use to suicide attempts, opening new perspectives for more integrated and holistic care in services.

Another relevant aspect is the support that clinical psychology offers to healthcare workers. Burnout and work-related stress are widespread problems in healthcare and social services (Maslach et al., 2001; Shanafelt, 2012; Ruotsalainen, 2015), and clinical psychologists can provide tools to manage these challenges, consequently improving the quality of care provided.

Clinical psychology also contributes to the humanization of healthcare services (Todres et al., 2009; Stewart et al., 2000), promoting a patient-centered approach and improving communication between patients and healthcare providers (Mead & Bower, 2000; Beach et al., 2006).

Clinical psychology thus emerges as an essential discipline in modern healthcare and psychological services, offering an irreplaceable contribution to the promotion of health and well-being for both patients and healthcare providers.

This Special Issue aims to spotlight the multifaceted role of clinical psychology in health promotion and wellness enhancement within healthcare settings. Our primary objective is to compile cutting-edge research and expert perspectives that demonstrate how clinical psychology is revolutionizing health promotion strategies across various medical domains.

We invite contributions that address the evolving nature of health conceptualization, the effectiveness of psychological interventions in diverse psychological and medical contexts, and the crucial role of clinical psychology in supporting both patients and healthcare providers.

The scope of this Special Issue encompasses a broad spectrum of health promotion topics through the lens of clinical psychology. We invite submissions exploring innovative psychological approaches to lifestyle modification and disease prevention, the integration of clinical psychology in public health initiatives, the application of health psychology principles in managing and preventing chronic illnesses, strategies for enhancing health literacy and patient empowerment, and interventions addressing the well-being of healthcare professionals.

Topic:

  1. Evolution of the health model: from biomedical to biopsychosocial
  2. Role of clinical psychology in health promotion
  3. Promotion of healthy behaviors through clinical psychology
  4. Psychological interventions in specific healthcare contexts (e.g., oncology, chronic pain management)
  5. Burnout and work-related stress in healthcare workers
  6. Psychological tools for stress management in healthcare workers
  7. Humanization of healthcare services
  8. Patient-centered approach in care
  9. Intercultural approach in healthcare services
  10. Improving communication between patients and healthcare providers
  11. Effectiveness of psychological interventions in healthcare settings
  12. Adaptation of psychological interventions to individual and community needs
  13. Interconnection between mind and body in health
  14. Circular or dialogical definitions of health
  15. Contribution of clinical psychology to addiction management
  16. Role of clinical psychology in suicide prevention

References

  1. Engel, G. L. (1977). The need for a new medical model: A challenge for biomedicine. Science, 196(4286), 129-136.
  2. Huber, M., Knottnerus, J. A., Green, L., van der Horst, H., Jadad, A. R., Kromhout, D., ... & Smid, H. (2011). How should we define health? BMJ, 343, d4163.
  3. Larson, J. S. (1999). The conceptualization of health. Medical Care Research and Review, 56(2), 123-136.
  4. Bircher, J., & Kuruvilla, S. (2014). Defining health by addressing individual, social, and environmental determinants: New opportunities for health care and public health. Journal of Public Health Policy, 35(3), 363-386.
  5. Turchi, G. P., & Della Torre, C. (2007). Psicologia della salute. Dal modello bio-psico-sociale al modello dialogico. Armando Editore.
  6. Kaplan, R. M. (2000). Two pathways to prevention. American Psychologist, 55(4), 382-396.
  7. Taylor, S. E. (2018). Health psychology (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
  8. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 397-422.
  9. Shanafelt, T. D., Boone, S., Tan, L., Dyrbye, L. N., Sotile, W., Satele, D., ... & Oreskovich, M. R. (2012). Burnout and satisfaction with work-life balance among US physicians relative to the general US population. Archives of Internal Medicine, 172(18), 1377-1385.
  10. Ruotsalainen, J. H., Verbeek, J. H., Mariné, A., & Serra, C. (2015). Preventing occupational stress in healthcare workers. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (4).
  11. Todres, L., Galvin, K. T., & Holloway, I. (2009). The humanization of healthcare: A value framework for qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being, 4(2), 68-77.
  12. Stewart, M., Brown, J. B., Donner, A., McWhinney, I. R., Oates, J., Weston, W. W., & Jordan, J. (2000). The impact of patient-centered care on outcomes. Journal of Family Practice, 49(9), 796-804.
  13. Mead, N., & Bower, P. (2000). Patient-centredness: a conceptual framework and review of the empirical literature. Social Science & Medicine, 51(7), 1087-1110.
  14. Beach, M. C., Inui, T., & Relationship-Centered Care Research Network. (2006). Relationship-centered care: A constructive reframing. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 21(S1), S3-S8.

Dr. Antonio Iudici
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 250 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for assessment.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-anonymized peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Healthcare is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2700 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • clinical psychology
  • health promotion
  • dialogical health
  • healthcare settings
  • psychological interventions
  • holistic health

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • Reprint: MDPI Books provides the opportunity to republish successful Special Issues in book format, both online and in print.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (3 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

20 pages, 2288 KB  
Article
“Why Aren’t You Listening?”: How Experiences of Endometriosis, Medical Dismissal, and Psychological Distress Should Influence Assessment and Interventions
by Panagiota Tragantzopoulou, Aikaterini Tragantzopoulou and Vaitsa Giannouli
Healthcare 2026, 14(16), 2496; https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare14162496 - 11 Aug 2026
Viewed by 123
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Endometriosis is a chronic gynecological condition affecting approximately 10% of women of reproductive age and is associated with chronic pain, fatigue, infertility, and reduced quality of life. Beyond its physical burden, delayed diagnosis, healthcare dismissal, and inadequate support may contribute substantially [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: Endometriosis is a chronic gynecological condition affecting approximately 10% of women of reproductive age and is associated with chronic pain, fatigue, infertility, and reduced quality of life. Beyond its physical burden, delayed diagnosis, healthcare dismissal, and inadequate support may contribute substantially to psychological distress. In line with growing efforts to promote mental health and wellbeing within healthcare settings, this study explored women’s experiences of healthcare services and the psychological impact of living with endometriosis. Methods: A qualitative study was conducted using thematic analysis of 2500 publicly available Twitter/X posts shared by accounts self-presenting as women discussing experiences of endometriosis. Results: Three overarching themes were identified: (1) Institutional Invalidation of Women’s Endometriosis Experiences, (2) Living with the Multidimensional Burden of Endometriosis, and (3) Reimagining Endometriosis Care. Participants described chronic pain, reproductive uncertainty, and significant emotional distress that were frequently intensified by delayed diagnosis and experiences of not being believed or taken seriously within healthcare settings. Accounts suggested that suffering was shaped not only by disease symptoms but also by interactions with healthcare systems that undermined the legitimacy of women’s experiences. Conversely, validation, empathy, and collaborative communication were associated with improved wellbeing and engagement with care. Participants advocated for greater awareness of endometriosis, earlier diagnosis, and more integrated models of support. Conclusions: Endometriosis should be understood as a biopsychosocial condition whose impact extends beyond physical symptoms alone. The narratives analyzed highlight how psychological distress may be amplified by experiences of invalidation, delayed recognition, and fragmented care. Improving outcomes requires timely diagnosis, patient-centered healthcare interactions, and the integration of psychological support within multidisciplinary endometriosis services. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 347 KB  
Article
Heterogeneity in Dyadic Coping Among Infertile Couples and Its Association with Depression and Fertility Quality of Life: A Latent Profile Analysis
by Xian Zhang, Yuetong Pei, Shanshan Dou, Chunhui Zhang, Yandan Duan and Jinling Gao
Healthcare 2026, 14(8), 1031; https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare14081031 - 14 Apr 2026
Viewed by 826
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to identify distinct dyadic coping profiles among infertile couples undergoing assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) and to examine the associations between these coping profiles, depressive symptoms, and fertility quality of life (FertiQOL). Methods: A total of 271 infertile [...] Read more.
Objective: This study aimed to identify distinct dyadic coping profiles among infertile couples undergoing assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) and to examine the associations between these coping profiles, depressive symptoms, and fertility quality of life (FertiQOL). Methods: A total of 271 infertile couples undergoing ARTs were recruited from a reproductive medicine center in Zhengzhou, China, and completed standardized self-report measures. Latent profile analysis was conducted to identify distinct dyadic coping profiles at the couple level. Multinomial logistic regression was used to examine sociodemographic and infertility-related predictors of profile membership. Differences in depressive symptoms and FertiQoL across profiles were analyzed using the Bolck–Croon–Hagenaars method. Results: Four dyadic coping profiles were identified: high-coping wife and low-coping husband (15.4%), low dyadic coping (20.1%), medium dyadic coping (31.5%), and high dyadic coping (33.0%). Couples in the high dyadic coping profile reported the lowest levels of depression and the highest level of FertiQoL. Women in the low dyadic coping profile reported the highest depressive symptoms, while men in the high-coping wife and low-coping husband profile demonstrated the highest depression among male partners. Sociodemographic factors (household registration, family income) and infertility characteristics (type of infertility, infertility duration) were significant predictors of profile membership. Conclusions: Dyadic coping among infertile couples undergoing ARTs is heterogeneous and differentially associated with depression and FertiQoL. Low and asymmetric dyadic coping represent high-risk profiles linked to poorer outcomes in both partners. These findings suggest that dyadic coping may serve as a protective resource for infertile couples to improve their psychological well-being and quality of life, highlighting the importance of incorporating dyadic coping assessment into routine care and providing couple-centered psychosocial interventions in fertility care practice. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

22 pages, 460 KB  
Review
Difficulties in Accessing Mental Health Services: The Perspective of Users from Cultural Minorities
by Antonio Iudici and Giulia Gusella
Healthcare 2026, 14(14), 2083; https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare14142083 - 12 Jul 2026
Viewed by 361
Abstract
Background: Mental health services face significant challenges in providing equitable care to ethnic minority and migrant populations. Despite the right to healthcare, disparities in service use among minority communities reflect not only practical barriers but also deeper issues of cultural compatibility between patients [...] Read more.
Background: Mental health services face significant challenges in providing equitable care to ethnic minority and migrant populations. Despite the right to healthcare, disparities in service use among minority communities reflect not only practical barriers but also deeper issues of cultural compatibility between patients and health systems. Aim: This study aimed to provide a systematic overview of the main difficulties encountered by ethnic minority and migrant people when seeking psychological support from mental health services, with a specific focus on linguistic and communicative barriers and organisational and economic barriers. Methods: A scoping review was conducted using the SCOPUS database, searching for peer-reviewed studies focused on the European context. Studies were included if they addressed ethnic minorities’ experiences with mental health services from a user perspective and included primary research of any design. Studies focused exclusively on staff perspectives or not specifically addressing ethnic minorities’ help-seeking were excluded. Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria. A qualitative narrative synthesis was adopted, following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Results: People with an ethnic or migrant background face specific and compounded barriers when seeking mental health support. Two main categories were identified: linguistic and communicative difficulties, including language distance, limited interpreter availability, and the gap between Western biomedical models and cultural frameworks of distress; and organisational and economic obstacles, including poor knowledge of available services, socioeconomic disadvantage, stigma, and institutional distrust. Discussion: These barriers are deeply structural and cannot be addressed through awareness campaigns alone. Increased access to services is not inherently beneficial unless accompanied by a fundamental transformation ensuring that care is culturally appropriate, safe, and genuinely responsive to minority communities’ needs. Distrust of mental health services may in part reflect a historically grounded and legitimate response to institutions whose practices have not always served the interests of minority groups. Conclusions: Reducing disparities in mental health care requires multi-level intervention, including inclusive policies, training of culturally competent professionals, and a critical rethinking of the models underpinning mental healthcare care. Future research should attend not only to the quantity of service use among minority populations but to the quality, cultural legitimacy, and safety of the care provided. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop