School of Nursing, University of Ottawa, Canada.
School of Epidemiology Public Health, University of Ottawa, Canada.
Palliat Support Care. 2020 Feb;18(1):89-102. doi: 10.1017/S1478951519000506.
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.
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.
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.
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.
姑息治疗和精神关怀指南强调了对患者进行精神痛苦筛查的重要性。本综述的目的是综合用于筛查成人精神痛苦的测量工具的准确性研究证据。
对文献进行系统回顾。我们检索了五个科学数据库以确定相关文章。两名独立的审查员筛选、提取数据并评估研究方法学质量。
我们确定了五篇文章，这些文章提供了 24 种精神筛查措施的信息。在所有确定的措施中，两项意义/快乐和自我描述的挣扎具有最高的敏感性（82-87%），修订后的拉什方案具有最高的特异性（81-90%）。所有纳入研究的方法学质量都较低。
虽然大多数确定的精神筛查措施都很简短（由 1 到 12 项组成），但很少有足够的准确性来有效地筛查患者的精神痛苦。我们建议临床医生在选择和使用任何确定的措施来筛查精神痛苦时，运用他们的批判性评价技能和临床判断。
