These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The accuracy of measures in screening adults for spiritual suffering in health care settings: A systematic review.
    Author: Bahraini S, Gifford W, Graham ID, Wazni L, Brémault-Phillips S, Hackbusch R, Demers C, Egan M.
    Journal: Palliat Support Care; 2020 Feb; 18(1):89-102. PubMed ID: 31387655.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: Guidelines 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. METHODS: A 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. RESULTS: We 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 RESULTS: While 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.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]