BACKGROUND: To facilitate the addressing of spirituality in clinical practice, several authors have created instruments for obtaining a spiritual history. However, in only a few studies have authors compared these instruments. The aim of this study was to compare the most commonly used instruments for taking a spiritual history in a clinical setting. METHODS: A systematic review of spiritual history assessment was conducted in five stages: identification of instruments used in the literature (databases searching); relevant articles from title and initial abstract review; exclusion and Inclusion criteria; full text retrieval and final analysis of each instrument. RESULTS: A total of 2,641 articles were retrieved and after the analysis, 25 instruments were included. The authors independently evaluated each instrument on 16 different aspects. The instruments with the greatest scores in the final analysis were FICA, SPIRITual History, FAITH, HOPE, and the Royal College of Psychiatrists. Concerning all 25 instruments, 20 of 25 inquire about the influence of spirituality on a person's life and 17 address religious coping. Nevertheless, only four inquire about medical practices not allowed, six deal with terminal events, nine have mnemonics to facilitate their use, and five were validated. CONCLUSIONS: FICA, SPIRITual History, FAITH, HOPE, and Royal College of Psychiatrists scored higher in our analysis. The use of each instrument must be individualized, according to the professional reality, time available, patient profile, and settings.
BACKGROUND: To facilitate the addressing of spirituality in clinical practice, several authors have created instruments for obtaining a spiritual history. However, in only a few studies have authors compared these instruments. The aim of this study was to compare the most commonly used instruments for taking a spiritual history in a clinical setting. METHODS: A systematic review of spiritual history assessment was conducted in five stages: identification of instruments used in the literature (databases searching); relevant articles from title and initial abstract review; exclusion and Inclusion criteria; full text retrieval and final analysis of each instrument. RESULTS: A total of 2,641 articles were retrieved and after the analysis, 25 instruments were included. The authors independently evaluated each instrument on 16 different aspects. The instruments with the greatest scores in the final analysis were FICA, SPIRITual History, FAITH, HOPE, and the Royal College of Psychiatrists. Concerning all 25 instruments, 20 of 25 inquire about the influence of spirituality on a person's life and 17 address religious coping. Nevertheless, only four inquire about medical practices not allowed, six deal with terminal events, nine have mnemonics to facilitate their use, and five were validated. CONCLUSIONS: FICA, SPIRITual History, FAITH, HOPE, and Royal College of Psychiatrists scored higher in our analysis. The use of each instrument must be individualized, according to the professional reality, time available, patient profile, and settings.
Authors: Janaine Aline Camargo de Oliveira; Maria Inez Padula Anderson; Giancarlo Lucchetti; Eric Vinícius Ávila Pires; Lídia Maria Gonçalves Journal: J Relig Health Date: 2019-02
Authors: Mario Fernando Prieto Peres; Arão Belitardo de Oliveira; Frederico Camelo Leão; Homero Vallada; Alexander Moreira-Almeida; Giancarlo Lucchetti Journal: SSM Popul Health Date: 2018-09-07