Clinical Neuropsychology: Open Access
Open Access

Biomedicine; Psychology; Human health; Psychoneuroimmunology

Introduction

Biomedicine and psychology are two distinct but intricately intertwined fields that have significantly advanced our understanding of human health and well-being. Biomedicine primarily deals with the biological aspects of health, focusing on the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of diseases and disorders, while psychology delves into the complex workings of the human mind and behaviour. This article explores the fascinating relationship between biomedicine and psychology, shedding light on how their collaboration has reshaped our approach to healthcare and improved patient outcomes [1].

One of the most evident intersections between biomedicine and psychology is in the realm of mental health. Advances in biomedicine have greatly contributed to our understanding of the biological underpinnings of mental disorders. For instance, research has revealed that imbalances in neurotransmitters, structural brain abnormalities, and genetic factors play a crucial role in conditions such as depression, anxiety, and schizophrenia. Such biological insights have paved the way for the development of psychopharmacological interventions that directly target these underlying mechanisms. This has resulted in more effective treatment options for individuals struggling with mental health issues [2].

On the flip side, psychology plays a pivotal role in the biomedical field by acknowledging the profound influence of psychological factors on physical health. The field of psychosomatic medicine explores how emotions, stress, and mental well-being can significantly affect the development and progression of various medical conditions. Research has demonstrated that psychological interventions like cognitivebehavioural therapy (CBT) can complement biomedical treatments, enhancing the overall effectiveness of healthcare interventions [3 ].

Biomedicine and psychology join forces in the treatment of chronic illnesses, such as diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. Patients with chronic conditions often require lifestyle changes, adherence to medications, and emotional support. Collaborative care models that include both biomedical and psychological elements can provide patients with a holistic approach to managing their conditions. For instance, healthcare providers may integrate biofeedback techniques to help patients with hypertension learn to control their blood pressure, which, in turn, reduces their risk of cardiovascular events [4].

Psychoneuroimmunology is an emerging interdisciplinary field that examines the interactions between psychological processes, the nervous system, and the immune system. Studies in this field have revealed that stress, emotions, and social support can influence the immune response and susceptibility to various diseases. This knowledge has significant implications for cancer patients, transplant recipients, and individuals with autoimmune disorders, as it underscores the importance of addressing both psychological and biomedical factors in the treatment process [5].

Advances in biomedicine, particularly genomics, have paved the way for personalized medicine. Similarly, psychology has moved towards personalized interventions. Together, these two fields are working to tailor healthcare approaches to an individual's unique genetic and psychological makeup. In this context, treatment strategies can be optimized based on genetic predispositions, psychological profiles, and responses to therapy, offering the promise of more effective and individualized care [6].

Case Study

Sarah is a 45-year-old woman who was diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) eight years ago. Over time, her condition has progressively worsened, impacting her physical and emotional well-being. She experiences chronic pain, joint stiffness, and fatigue, and her mental health has significantly deteriorated due to the limitations imposed by her disease [7]. Biomedicine plays a crucial role in managing Sarah's RA. She has been prescribed various disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to mitigate the progression of her condition and alleviate pain. These medications are essential in controlling the biological aspects of her disease.

Recognizing the psychological toll of chronic illness, Sarah's healthcare team, which includes a rheumatologist, physical therapist, and a psychologist, has adopted a holistic approach. The psychologist, in particular, utilizes cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) techniques to help Sarah cope with the emotional aspects of her condition. Through therapy, Sarah learns to manage her anxiety and depression, which had developed as a result of the chronic pain and life-altering consequences of RA [8 ]. Psychological Support for Medication Adherence: Sarah's psychologist plays a crucial role in ensuring medication adherence. By addressing her emotional struggles, the psychologist helps Sarah understand the importance of her medications and supports her in adhering to the treatment plan.

Pain Management through Mind-Body Techniques: Sarah's physical therapist incorporates psychological techniques, such as mindfulness and relaxation exercises, into her rehabilitation program. This approach not only helps manage her pain but also improves her overall well-being. Stress Reduction for Disease Management: Understanding the link between stress and autoimmune diseases, Sarah's healthcare team works collectively to minimize stress in her life. Psychological interventions equip her with stress-reduction strategies, which complement the biomedicine interventions aimed at controlling inflammation and joint damage. Genetic testing reveals that Sarah may be more responsive to a particular type of DMARD [9 ]. This personalized approach, guided by biomedicine, aligns with the psychological aspect of her care by giving her a sense of control over her treatment.

The integrated approach to Sarah's care, which bridges biomedicine and psychology, has resulted in several positive outcomes:

Sarah's ability to cope with her pain has greatly improved through psychological interventions, leading to a reduced reliance on pain medications. Her depressive symptoms have significantly diminished, and she reports a more positive outlook on life. Understanding the psychological aspects of medication adherence has made her more consistent in taking her prescribed medications. The collaboration between biomedicine and psychology has led to personalized care that addresses both the biological and emotional aspects of her condition [10].

Conclusion

The interplay between biomedicine and psychology is a powerful partnership that has revolutionized healthcare. It has led to more comprehensive and patient-centric approaches, where the biological and psychological aspects of health are considered in concert rather than isolation. As these fields continue to evolve, the potential for breakthroughs in understanding, preventing, and treating various health conditions is immense. The collaboration between biomedicine and psychology is not only reshaping our healthcare system but also offering new hope and possibilities for improving the well-being of individuals worldwide.

1. Abrams R (1984) Genetic studies of the schizoaffective syndrome: a selective review. Schizophr Bull 10: 26-29.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

2. Bleuler E (1958) Dementia praecox or the group of schizophrenias, New York (InternationalUniversities Press) 1958.

Google Scholar

3. Aron AR (2007) The neural basis of inhibition in cognitive control. The neuroscientist 13: 214-228.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

4. Aron AR (2011) From reactive to proactive and selective control: developing a richer model for stopping inappropriate responses. Biol psychiatry 69: e55-e68.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

5. Badcock JC, Michie PT, Johnson L, Combrinck J (2002) Acts of control in schizophrenia: dissociating the components of inhibition. Psychol Med 32: 287-297.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

6. Bannon S, Gonsalvez CJ, Croft RJ, Boyce PM (2002) Response inhibition deficits in obsessive–compulsive disorder. Psychiatry Res 110: 165-174.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

7. Bellgrove MA, Chambers CD, Vance A, Hall N, Karamitsios M, et al. (2006) Lateralized deficit of response inhibition in early-onset schizophrenia. Psychol Med 36: 495-505.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

8. Benes FM, Vincent SL, Alsterberg G, Bird ED, SanGiovanni JP (1992) Increased GABAA receptor binding in superficial layers of cingulate cortex in schizophrenics. J Neurosci 12: 924-929.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

9. Bestelmeyer PE, Phillips LH, Crombiz C, Benson P, Clair DS (2009) The P300 as a possible endophenotype for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder: Evidence from twin and patient studies. Psychiatry res 169: 212-219.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

10. Blasi G, Goldberg TE, Weickert T, Das S, Kohn P, et al. (2006) Brain regions underlying response inhibition and interference monitoring and suppression. Eur J Neurosci 23: 1658-1664.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at