The relevance of the contribution of psychoneuroendocrinoimmunology and psychology of reasoning and decision making to nursing science: A discursive paper

Abstract

AbstractAimPatients' death or adverse events appear to be associated with poor healthcare decision‐making. This might be due to an inability to have an adequate representation of the problem or of the connections among problem‐related elements. Changing how a problem is formulated can reduce biases in clinical reasoning. The purpose of this article is to explore the possible contributions of psychoneuroendocrinoimmunology (PNEI) and psychology of reasoning and decision‐making (PRDM) to support a new nursing theoretical frame.DesignDiscursive paper.MethodThis article discusses the main assumptions about nursing and nurses' ability to face patient's problems, suggesting a new approach that integrates knowledge from PNEI and PRDM. While PNEI explains the complexity of systems, highlighting the importance of systems connections in affecting health, PRDM underlines the importance of the informative context in creating a mental representation of the problem. Furthermore, PRDM suggests the need to pay attention to information that is not immediately explicit and its connections.ConclusionNursing recognizes the patient–nurse relationship as the axiom that governs care. The integration of PNEI and PRDM in nursing theoretics allows the expansion of the axiom by providing essential elements to read a new type of relationship: the relationship among information. PNEI explains the relationships between biological systems and the psyche and between the whole individual and the environment; PRDM provides tools for the nurse's analytical thinking system to correctly process information and its connections.Impact on Nursing PracticeA theoretical renewal is mandatory to improve nursing reasoning and nursing priority identification. Integrating PNEI and PRDM into nursing theoretics will modify the way professionals approach patients, reducing cognitive biases and medical errors.No Patient or Public ContributionThere was no patient or public involvement in the design or writing of this discursive article.