ArticleBMJ open quality2024
Improving the assessment of cultural, religious and spiritual needs for patients at the end-of-life within an acute hospital trust.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing Cultural, Religious, and Spiritual Confidence and Perceived Preparedness in Community Palliative and End-of-Life Care: A Service Evaluation.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCultural, religious and spiritual (CRS) needs become increasingly important to individuals as they approach the end of life. CRS needs often remain unmet for patients dying in an acute hospital setting. The 'Just Ask' quality improvement project was designed to explore barriers to routine assessment of CRS needs, and to design resources and intervention to support staff to increase assessment of these needs.
aimsThe primary aim of the project was to increase the number of patients receiving end-of-life care in hospital with a documented CRS needs assessment from 43% (based on audit data) to greater than 50% over the 9-month project.
designThe study occurred in two phases.The scoping phase evaluated the current service, enablers, barriers and confidence in assessing CRS needs using an online staff survey and four staff focus groups. Results were analysed using qualitative content analysis, descriptive statistics and thematic analysis and informed the intervention phase.The intervention phase consisted of two Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles focusing on resource visibility/accessibility, organisational value placed on CRS needs assessment and staff education.Outcomes (documented CRS needs assessment) were measured by case notes review over 3 month periods - 1 year prior to and after the PDSA cycles. The impact of education interventions on staff confidence relating to CRS needs assessment were measured via an anonymous questionnaire. OUTCOME: Documented assessment of CRS needs increased from 43% to 57% in patients receiving end-of-life care in our hospital. Staff confidence scores in CRS needs assessment increased by 46-87%.
conclusionsThe factors that influence the addressing of CRS needs in a busy hospital are multifactorial. Organisational culture, appropriate resource provision and visibility, and education are essential factors in supporting staff to recognise, understand and engage with CRS needs assessment in patients receiving end-of-life care in hospital.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.