The tradition of integrating health care and art has a long and deep history; its origins date back to when the first hospitals arose from church-run hostels for pilgrims and other travellers. To understand the development and importance of art in healthcare, we must understand the great change that has occurred in healthcare institutions over the decades because, as healthcare institutions have changed over the years, the art within them has also changed. Taking her cue from Florence Nightingale, a prolific nurse who raised nursing standards during the Crimean War in 1854, she spoke of the importance of aesthetic pleasure and distraction: Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essayI have seen in fevers... the most acute suffering produced by the patient, the inability to see out the window and the knots in the woods is the only sight. I will never forget the ecstasy of fever patients in front of a bouquet of brightly colored flowers. People say the effect is only on the mind. This is not so; the effect is also on the body. By the 6th century BC it is evident that the ancient Greeks saw a link between the arts and healing; a hospital in Epidaurus stood next to a statue of Asclepius, the god of healing. They also had temples dedicated to both physical and spiritual healing dating back to 200 BC, adorned with marble reliefs and statues. People dedicated images of which body parts had caused them problems: they served as souvenirs of what had been healed as a sign of "thanks" to the healing god. The word hospital comes from the Latin word hospital, meaning a house for the reception and entertainment of pilgrims, travelers and foreigners, without any connection with disease. Although the ancient Greeks may not have understood the healing power of art, the principle of the art was there to enlighten and transcend the viewer or provide hope to those who needed help during times of illness. Moving on to the medieval period, we see a more defined connection between art and the moral principles of the institution. It was in these times that the modern hospital was born. Paradoxically, in some respects, Christianity had a rather negative effect on medicine: anatomy was denounced, human dissection was prohibited because the human body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, the occurrence of miracles favored superstition and diseases were consider it a punishment for sin. The Church progressively monopolized the predominantly monastic hospital system, which for the time provided a valuable service to the sick and elderly but contributed little to the progress of medical science. Medieval hospitals contained incredible artistic embellishments; which usually reflected the religious nature of the institution and offered images that clearly framed the disease in a context of belief, the interior reflected the wealth of the patron or founder. This can be seen throughout the Renaissance, but perhaps done more elaborately. Renaissance hospitals had highly prized works of art in their places of care, works that reflected their place in history. The hospitals of Renaissance Italy were the concrete embodiment of physical and spiritual healing. Moving on to the 15th century we see kings and rulers shift their charitable work from the construction of cathedrals to that of hospitals to carry out good works on this earth. and to help them continue. An interesting example of this is St Wulstan Hospital in Worcester; where once there was a room where patients were taken to spend their last days of illness, this room contained 10 panels with scenesof St. Erasmus, and on the opposite wall was "St. Michael weighing souls to decide their fate, in heaven or hell".[One of the most discussed and historic pieces of hospital artwork is the ' William Hogarth's Christ at' the Pool of Bethesda' in St Bartholomew's Hospital, London Hogarth painted this large fresco for free, but he did so to promote himself as an artist. The painting is a visual account of the art required for hospitals in this period, to show what San Bartolomeo represented as a healthcare institution. Painted in 1736 depicting an episode from the Gospel of St. John, the painting depicts Jesus Christ tending a leper lying on the ground, surrounded by other sick people. Hogarth himself said of his work at St Bartholomew's: "my dramatic object and my object to wring tears from the spectator". I think this is an excellent example of what art in healthcare once was and what it once represented, in a way it carries with it the same principles of hope and recovery aimed at the mind and spirit of patients. Dr. Hugh Baron explains this perfectly in his essay on the History of Art in Hospitals "Patients were exposed to images of deity so they could pray for their healing, pray for hospital patrons, or pray for immortality" . 1877 British Medical Journal article by Joseph Moore, chairman of the management committee of the Seamen's Hospital, issued a public appeal to "help him decorate the wards of the institution with pictures so as to dispel the depressing monotony of the dead walls... i paintings should be simple color prints.” With the proliferation of Victorian public welfare, those elaborate art forms in hospitals had largely disappeared, however, it was after 1910 that little or no art was placed in hospitals in Europe due to the changes in architectural fashion. Architectural fashion was exemplified by August Perrier "decoration always hides an error of construction" and by his student Le Corbusier - "a house is a machine for living, it is the wall that is the work of art" and this attitude was reflected in healthcare institutions in the early 20th century. An interesting point which Dr. Hugh Baron points out as contributing to the distancing of art from architecture in this period may have been because of the "then fashionable dogma that Romanesque and Gothic cathedrals and Greek temples and their structures were all white" because they appeared in textbooks as black and white photographs, this myth of the 1920s "resisted until the 1960s and for many decades hospitals, departments and patients had to suffer environments in which color and decoration were taboo". During the early years of the NHS "they paid little regard within their walls to the aesthetic dimensions of existence. They were essentially environments for the treatment of disease." It was during this period that we really began to separate the two disciples of art and of healing. Art in healthcare settings has "often been seen as an optional extra, as something to be added when resources allow, and in hospitals, as a comfort rather than an integral part of the healing and healing process." enforced rules and regulations for greater hygiene, but the buildings became squalid and lifeless: "patients lay in bed with nothing to look at but a blank wall. Asylums were placed in the countryside, away from urban areas, but even for a nice view - the same was not thought of in tuberculosis wards During the 1960s and 1970s, "less care" became the standard of care, accompanied perhaps by an unwritten but nevertheless strong assumption that decoration was. frivolous and self-indulgent and inin any case it subtracted the funds necessary for the "real" purpose. “Most of the buildings that made up the NHS in its early years paid little attention to the aesthetic dimensions of existence within their walls. They were largely environments for the treatment of diseases.' From this we can see a clear reflection of what was happening in society, and what was happening in hospitals, since ancient Greek times; a deep connection between art and healing, until the 15th century, when art in hospitals became more about patronage and money, the early 20th century reflected the minimalist sensibility that lasted for over 50 years. The benefits and importance of art in healthcare Art should not be seen as one of those activities like physiotherapy that is incidental to medicine; nor as an alternative to medicine. He is concerned without common sensibilities and our shared vision of what life is and how it should be lived. Art has the power to reconcile us with the painful problems that life presents, with its truths, with the suffering and sacrifices it entails for so many people. The idea that art can have constructive benefits in healthcare is not a new concept and has been recognized by artists and healthcare professionals. While the benefits may not have been known as far back as ancient Greek times, "our ancestors lived in a state of unity between the physical and the spiritual, the visible and the invisible." However, there is a constant conflict between human standards on the one hand and institutional efficiency on the other; art can sometimes be ignored. The potential of the arts in healthcare is vast as everyone needs healthcare at some point in their lives. However, people's quality of life is the primary consideration. It is very difficult to scientifically measure the claims made about the impact of the arts and the visual environment on patient recovery. I will present key case studies that have shown that art in healthcare has benefits for patients and staff. It cannot be easy to heal in a soulless concrete box, with anonymous windows, inhospitable corridors and purely functional departments. The spirit needs healing as does the body. Over the last twenty years, there has been growing international recognition of the contribution the arts can make to health, quality of life... and to those working in healthcare settings. Since the 1980s, arts programs have opened in hundreds of hospitals, clinics and community centers around the world, and there has been an increase in government support for this work. The first and most recognized study on the influence of the surrounding environment and aesthetics in healthcare settings was conducted by Dr. Roger Ulrich in 1984, entitled "A view through a window can influence recovery after surgery", in which Ulrich showed us that viewing nature from the hospital bed can significantly speed up postoperative recovery, Ulrich describes that "most nature views apparently arouse positive feelings, reduce fear in stressed subjects, maintain interest and can block or reduce stressful thoughts, they could also promote recovery from anxiety or stress by analyzing nurses' notes and the time spent in hospital by the patient, comparing them with those of the patient in a room with a white wall and patients in a room with a window. In another study on the effects on the environment, Ulrich points out that "despite the severe stress caused by illness and traumatizing hospital experiences, relatively little importance has been given to creating an environment that calms patients, strengthenstheir coping resources or otherwise face psychological and social problems". The most comprehensive and large-scale study aimed at analyzing the social impact of arts initiatives in Britain was undertaken between September 1995 and March 1997. The study concluded that “participation in the arts is an effective path to personal growth” and that the arts have a positive impact on the way people feel, they also contribute “to social cohesion by developing networks and understanding”. many studies in this field of research, however many articles have been published discussing the importance of art, one of which is by Anne Scott, entitled The Relationship between the Arts and Medicine, written in 2000. Where she outlines the three main contributions that art can bring about "whole person understanding", that is, understanding the individual; discusses how art can stimulate and share common experiences with viewers and a way to open a conversation between viewers. 'Medicine and art have a common goal; to complete what nature cannot accomplish, to achieve an ideal, and to heal creation.' In 2006 the New Zealand Department of Health reported that the arts have a clear contribution to creating and providing greater opportunities in providing better health, wellbeing and a better experience for patients, service users and staff. “Good design must be a central consideration and will ensure that the hospital provides a high-quality environment that supports a positive healing experience.” A more recent study conducted in 2016 titled “How Do Patients Actually Experience and Use Art in Hospitals?” The meaning of the interaction; a user-oriented experimental case study explores the contribution that visual art in hospitals has to healing outcomes. Conducted by four Danish scientists. An experiment was conducted for two weeks, the first week the walls were stripped and painted white, and within the week two works of art were hung. He demonstrated that "works of art influence the practice and atmosphere of sociability." And that the works of art showed a positive effect on the social environment in the living room by activating patients to dialogue.' It was more than just healing, the artwork was used as a common frame of reference and involved a mood of togetherness, ease and kinship.' Patients experienced that art had the potential to positively distract them from uncomfortable situations of illness, directly addressing their memories of themselves as individual, social and cultural beings… positive distraction, in praxis, language and atmosphere. These effects are particularly important in relation to patients who experience deprivation of identity and power during hospital admission. While studies on art in healthcare have been conducted to demonstrate the social and holistic benefits of including art in healthcare settings, it is understandable to understand why clients and users of healthcare services want art to be justified. “The issue of evidence has become urgent in relation to artistic practices in healthcare” Healthcare users work in an environment of “cure or cure” and evidence-based medicine “the purpose of EBM (evidence-based medicine ) is to identify , replicable, cost-effective interventions that can deliver positive clinical outcomes to a target population and this is applied to every aspect of the healthcare context, including art. Although the full scope of the art cannot be measured and “artistic practices are not replicable”. Evaluation is still necessary on works of art and on -’.