4.5 Article

Meaning-Centered Interventions for Patients With Advanced or Terminal Cancer A Meta-analysis

Journal

CANCER NURSING
Volume 42, Issue 4, Pages 332-340

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000628

Keywords

Anxiety; Palliative care; Quality of life; Spiritual care; Terminal cancer

Funding

  1. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Science and ICT [2017R1A2B1009570]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2017R1A2B1009570] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background For patients with advanced or terminal cancer undergoing hospice or palliative care, spiritual care based on meaning-centered intervention (MCI) has become an essential form of support. Objective The aim of this study was to characterize MCI systematically and the effectiveness of hospice and palliative care for patients with advanced or terminal cancer. Methods MEDLINE via PubMed, Cochrane Library CENTRAL, EMBASE, CINAHL, and several Korean electronic databases were searched from inception to May 2017. The RevMan 5.3 program of the Cochrane Library was used for data analysis. Results A meta-analysis was conducted of 10 controlled trials (6 randomized and 4 nonrandomized) featuring 623 patients with cancer. Meaning-centered interventions were compared with usual care control groups or other psychosocial interventions. The weighted average effect sizes across studies were -0.96 (P < .001, I-2 = 7%) for meaning in life, -0.37 (P = .002, I-2 = 0%) for spiritual well-being, -0.48 (P < .001, I-2 = 0%) for quality of life, -0.28 (P = .02, I-2 = 0%) for anxiety, and -0.31 (P = .02, I-2 = 17%) for physical symptoms. Conclusion Spiritual care based on MCI may help to improve the physical, psychosocial, and spiritual well-being of patients with advanced or terminal cancer.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available