Desire for hastened death among terminally ill cancer patients is not uncommon. Depression and hopelessness are the strongest predictors of desire for hastened death in this population and provide independent and unique contributions. Interventions addressing depression, hopelessness, and social support appear to be important aspects of adequate palliative care, particularly as it relates to desire for hastened death.

Objectives An increasingly important concern for clinicians who care for patients at the end of life is their spiritual well-being and sense of meaning and purpose in life. In response to the need for short-term interventions to address spiritual well-being, we developed Meaning Centered Group Psychotherapy (MCGP) to help patients with advanced cancer sustain or enhance a sense of meaning, peace and purpose in their lives, even as they approach the end of life. Methods Patients with advanced (stage III or IV) solid tumor cancers (N = 90) were randomly assigned to either MCGP or a supportive group psychotherapy (SGP). Patients were assessed before and after completing the 8-week intervention, and again 2 months after completion. Outcome assessment included measures of spiritual well-being, meaning, hopelessness, desire for death, optimism/pessimism, anxiety, depression and overall quality of life. Results MCGP resulted in significantly greater improvements in spiritual well-being and a sense of meaning. Treatment gains were even more substantial (based on effect size estimates) at the second follow-up assessment. Improvements in anxiety and desire for death were also significant (and increased over time). There was no significant improvement on any of these variables for patients participating in SGP. Conclusions MCGP appears to be a potentially beneficial intervention for patients’ emotional and spiritual suffering at the end of life. Further research, with larger samples, is clearly needed to better understand the potential benefits of this novel intervention.

No abstract

We conducted two studies with medically hospitalized cancer and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) patients to assess the reliability and validity of a new measure of delirium severity, the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS). The first study used multiple raters who jointly administered the MDAS to 33 patients, 17 of whom met DSM III-R/DSM IV criteria for delirium, 8 met diagnostic criteria for another cognitive impairment disorder (for example, dementia), and 8 had non-cognitive psychiatric disorders (for example, adjustment disorder). Results indicate high levels of inter-rater reliability for the MDAS (0.92) and the individual MDAS items (ranging from 0.64 to 0.99), as well as high levels of internal consistency (coefficient alpha = 0.91). Mean MDAS ratings differed significantly between delirious patients and the comparison sample of patients with other cognitive impairment disorders or no cognitive impairment (P < 0.0002). The second study compared MDAS ratings of 51 medically hospitalized delirious patients with cancer and AIDS made by one clinician to ratings on several other measures of delirium (Delirium Rating Scale, clinician's ratings of delirium severely) and cognitive functioning (Mini-Mental State Examination) made by a second clinician. Results demonstrated a high correlation between MDAS scores and ratings on the Delirium Rating Scale (r = 0.88, p < 0.0001), the Mini-Mental State Examination (r = -0.91, P < 0.0001), and clinician's global ratings of delirium severity (r = 0.89, P < 0.0001). Thus, our findings indicate that the MDAS is a brief, reliable tool for assessing delirium severity among medically ill populations that can be reliably scored by multiple raters. The MDAS is highly correlated with existing measures of delirium and cognitive impairment, yet offers several advantages over these instruments for repeated assessments which are often necessary in clinical research.

Physicians' perceptions of depressive symptoms in their patients are correlated with patient's ratings, but there is a marked tendency to underestimate the level of depressive symptoms in patients who are more depressed. They are most influenced by symptoms such as crying and depressed mood, and medical factors that are useful, but not the most reliable, indicators of depression in this population. Physicians' ratings of their patients' distress symptoms seem to be global in nature--they are highly correlated with anxiety, pain, and global dysfunction. Physician assessment might be improved if they were instructed to assess and probe for the more reliable cognitive symptoms such as anhedonia, guilt, suicidal thinking, and hopelessness. Screening instruments and the use of brief follow-up interviews would help to identify patients who are depressed.

Purpose To test the efficacy of meaning-centered group psychotherapy (MCGP) to reduce psychological distress and improve spiritual well-being in patients with advanced or terminal cancer. Patients and Methods Patients with advanced cancer (N = 253) were randomly assigned to manualized eight-session interventions of either MCGP or supportive group psychotherapy (SGP). Patients were assessed before and after completing the treatment and 2 months after treatment. The primary outcome measures were spiritual well-being and overall quality of life, with secondary outcome measures assessing depression, hopelessness, desire for hastened death, anxiety, and physical symptom distress. Results Hierarchical linear models that included a priori covariates and only participants who attended ≥ three sessions indicated a significant group × time interaction for most outcome variables. Specifically, patients receiving MCGP showed significantly greater improvement in spiritual well-being and quality of life and significantly greater reductions in depression, hopelessness, desire for hastened death, and physical symptom distress compared with those receiving SGP. No group differences were observed for changes in anxiety. Analyses that included all patients, regardless of whether they attended any treatment sessions (ie, intent-to-treat analyses), and no covariates still showed significant treatment effects (ie, greater benefit for patients receiving MCGP v SGP) for quality of life, depression, and hopelessness but not for other outcome variables. Conclusion This large randomized controlled study provides strong support for the efficacy of MCGP as a treatment for psychological and existential or spiritual distress in patients with advanced cancer.

Purpose Spiritual well-being and sense of meaning are important concerns for clinicians who care for patients with cancer. We developed Individual Meaning-Centered Psychotherapy (IMCP) to address the need for brief interventions targeting spiritual well-being and meaning for patients with advanced cancer. Patients and Methods Patients with stage III or IV cancer (N = 120) were randomly assigned to seven sessions of either IMCP or therapeutic massage (TM). Patients were assessed before and after completing the intervention and 2 months postintervention. Primary outcome measures assessed spiritual well-being and quality of life; secondary outcomes included anxiety, depression, hopelessness, symptom burden, and symptom-related distress. Results Of the 120 participants randomly assigned, 78 (65%) completed the post-treatment assessment and 67 (56%) completed the 2-month follow-up. At the post-treatment assessment, IMCP participants demonstrated significantly greater improvement than the control condition for the primary outcomes of spiritual well-being (b = 0.39; P <.001, including both components of spiritual well-being (sense of meaning: b = 0.34; P = .003 and faith: b = 0.42; P = .03), and quality of life (b = 0.76; P = .013). Significantly greater improvements for IMCP patients were also observed for the secondary outcomes of symptom burden (b = −6.56; P < .001) and symptom-related distress (b = −0.47; P < .001) but not for anxiety, depression, or hopelessness. At the 2-month follow-up assessment, the improvements observed for the IMCP group were no longer significantly greater than those observed for the TM group. Conclusion IMCP has clear short-term benefits for spiritual suffering and quality of life in patients with advanced cancer. Clinicians working with patients who have advanced cancer should consider IMCP as an approach to enhance quality of life and spiritual well-being.

No abstract