Spiritual Health Concept in Iranian Society: Evolutionary Concept Analysis and Narrative Review

Background and Aim: Health is a holistic concept, incorporates physical, social, cultural, emotional, spiritual, political, mental, mystical, intrinsic, communicative and cognitive dimensions. From aforesaid dimensions, spiritual health is the least understood and most challenged concept. The aim of the study was to explain the concept of spiritual health. Methods: In this multi methods research, narrative review method was utilized with three-step-searching in scientific information database (SID) up to the November 2015 about religion, spirituality, spiritual health, religious beliefs and the effect of spiritual health on the body and soul health. Also, to demonstrate conceptual model of spiritual health, Rodgers's Evolutionary concept analysis method was used. Ethical Considerations : Moral rules such as honesty and integrity were taken into consideration in the analysis and report of searched literature. Results: From 3136 articles resulting from the primary search in the step one, 16 articles were scrutinized, totally, three themes including spiritual health concept and its dimensions, spiritual health relationship with others health dimensions and health concept model were extracted. Conclusion: Although, the results of the study provide preliminary definition of spiritual health concept and its dimensions; spiritual health and its sub-categorizations, are ambiguous concepts with unclear domains so that, there is a necessity for more analyzing and investigation to indiscriminate and discern it. Exact definition and identification of spiritual health with ascertained effects and extensive beliefs of people to it; can effectively be conducted as an appropriate strategy for more influences of treatments and even non-drug treatments. Please cite this article as: Hajiesmaeili MR, Abbasi M, Safaiepour L, Fani M, Abdoljabari M, Hosseini SM, et al . Spiritual Health Concept in Iranian Society: Evolutionary Concept Analysis and Narrative Review.  Med Ethics J  2016; 10(35): 77-115.