Distinguishing Between Spiritual Distress, General Distress, Spiritual Well-Being, and Spiritual Pain Among Cancer Patients During Oncology Treatment

Schultz, Michael; Meged-Book, Tehilah; Mashiach, Tanya; Bar-Sela, Gil

doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2017.03.018

Cited by 44 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The five included studies were published between 2009 and 2017, and the majority (80%) were from the United States (see Table 2). Three were conducted at cancer centers with patients (Fitchett, Murphy & King, 2017; King et al, 2017, Schultz et al, 2017). One study was conducted with patients admitted to an acute medical rehabilitation center (Fitchett & Risk, 2009), and one with parents of children with cystic fibrosis (CF) at a hospital CF center (Grossoehme & Fitchett, 2013).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The accuracy of measures in screening adults for spiritual suffering in health care settings: A systematic review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveGuidelines for palliative and spiritual care emphasize the importance of screening patients for spiritual suffering. The aim of this review was to synthesize the research evidence of the accuracy of measures used to screen adults for spiritual suffering.MethodsA systematic review of the literature. We searched five scientific databases to identify relevant articles. Two independent reviewers screened, extracted data, and assessed study methodological quality.ResultsWe identified five articles that yielded information on 24 spiritual screening measures. Among all identified measures, the two-item Meaning/Joy & Self-Described Struggle has the highest sensitivity (82–87%), and the revised Rush protocol had the highest specificity (81–90%). The methodological quality of all included studies was low.Significance of ResultsWhile most of the identified spiritual screening measures are brief (comprised 1 to 12 items), few had sufficient accuracy to effectively screen patients for spiritual suffering. We advise clinicians to use their critical appraisal skills and clinical judgment when selecting and using any of the identified measures to screen for spiritual suffering.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The accuracy of measures in screening adults for spiritual suffering in health care settings: A systematic review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Accordingly, in this study participants commonly identified non-clinical concerns such as finances and worry/anxiety. These concerns have been identified as being a substantial burden with individuals much more likely to rate their physical health, mental health, and satisfaction with social activities and relationships as poor compared to those with no financial hardship (28). For that reason, relieving financial burden is likely to have had a substantially positive impact on other areas of concern, which may also add to the interpretation of the findings in this study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

Meeting Psychosocial Needs to Improve Health: A Prospective Cohort Study

Snowden

Young

Savinc

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Cancer impacts on patients and their families across a range of different domains. For that reason, optimal cancer care has moved away from a disease-centric focus to a more holistic approach in order to proactively support people with their individual needs and concerns. While international policy clearly advocates this agenda, implementation into routine care is limited. Therefore, relevant interventions that measurably improve patient outcomes are essential to understand if this ideal is to become routine multidisciplinary practice. The aim of this study was to analyse the impact of a proactive, holistic, community-based intervention on health-related quality of life in a cohort of people diagnosed with cancer. Secondary aim was to explore the relationship between changes in health status and: cancer type, cancer stage, number of concerns expressed and change in severity of concerns pre and post intervention. Method Prospective observational cohort study. A convenience sample of 437 individuals were referred to the service ‘Improving the Cancer Journey (ICJ) in the UK. Each completed the Euroqol EQ-5D-3L and visual analogue scale (VAS) and a Holistic Needs Assessment (HNA) during initial visit to the service and again at follow-up review, approximately 4 months later. Change between scores was tested with paired t-tests and relationships between variables with multiple regression models. Results Participants were White British with median age between 50-64 years. Cancer type and stage were varied. There was a statistically significant improvement in EQ-5D scores over time (t(330)=7.48, p<.001). The strongest predictor of change was a decrease in severity of concerns. Cancer stage ‘palliative care’ contributed to a reduction in health status. Conclusion This study is the first to show that a holistic community intervention dedicated to supporting the individual concerns of participants has a statistically and meaningful impact on participants’ health-related quality of life. The mean change in EQ-5D scores was more than the ‘minimally important clinical difference’ described in the literature. This is important because while quality of life has multiple determinants this study has reported that it is possible to capture a meaningful improvement as a function of reducing someone’s personally identified concerns.

show abstract

“…Identifying and assessing individual concerns [34][35][36] is unarguably beneficial as it can help, amongst other things, with resource allocation. However, to our knowledge, this is the first study to quantify what this means to individuals' health related quality of life.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meeting psychosocial needs to improve health: a prospective cohort study

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Cancer impacts on patients and their families across a range of different domains. For that reason, optimal cancer care has moved away from a disease-centric focus to a more holistic approach in order to proactively support people with their individual needs and concerns. While international policy clearly advocates this agenda, implementation into routine care is limited. Therefore, relevant interventions that measurably improve patient outcomes are essential to understand if this ideal is to become routine multidisciplinary practice. The aim of this study was to analyse the impact of a proactive, holistic, community-based intervention on health-related quality of life in a cohort of people diagnosed with cancer. Secondary aim was to explore the relationship between changes in health status and: cancer type, cancer stage, number of concerns expressed and change in severity of concerns pre and post intervention. Method: Prospective observational cohort study. A convenience sample of 437 individuals were referred to the service 'Improving the Cancer Journey (ICJ) in the UK. Each completed the Euroqol EQ-5D-3 L and visual analogue scale (VAS) and a Holistic Needs Assessment (HNA) during initial visit to the service and again at follow-up review, median 84 days later. Change between scores was tested with paired t-tests and relationships between variables with multiple regression models with heteroscedasticity-consistent standard errors. Results: Participants were White British with median age between 50 and 64 years. Cancer type and stage were varied. EQ-5D utility scores improved at follow-up by 0.121 [0.0891-0.153], p < .001, and VAS scores improved by 7.81 [5.88-9.74], p < .001. The strongest predictor of change was a decrease in severity of concerns. Cancer stage 'palliative care' contributed to a reduction in health status. Conclusion: This study is the first to show that a holistic community intervention dedicated to supporting the individual concerns of participants had both a statistically significant and clinically meaningful impact on participants' health-related quality of life. The mean change in EQ-5D scores was more than the 'minimally important clinical difference' described in the literature. This is important because while quality of life has multiple determinants, this study has shown for the first time that it is possible to capture a clinically meaningful improvement as a function of reducing someone's personally identified concerns.

show abstract

Distinguishing Between Spiritual Distress, General Distress, Spiritual Well-Being, and Spiritual Pain Among Cancer Patients During Oncology Treatment

Abstract: The DT is not sufficient to identify spiritual distress. The peace subscale of FACIT-Sp-12 is a better match than the measure as a whole. The SIS is the best match for spiritual distress, although an imperfect one.

Cited by 44 publications

References 29 publications

The accuracy of measures in screening adults for spiritual suffering in health care settings: A systematic review

The accuracy of measures in screening adults for spiritual suffering in health care settings: A systematic review

Meeting Psychosocial Needs to Improve Health: A Prospective Cohort Study

Meeting psychosocial needs to improve health: a prospective cohort study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About