Journal Home
Search for

Volume 38, Issue 5, Pages 641-649 (November 2009)


View previous. 6 of 23 View next.

The Landscape of Distress in the Terminally Ill

Harvey Max Chochinov, MD, PhDabdefCorresponding Author Informationemail address, Thomas Hassard, PhDb, Susan McClement, PhDcd, Thomas Hack, PhD, CPsychce, Linda J. Kristjanson, PhDf, Mike Harlos, MDg, Shane Sinclair, BA, MDiv, PhD (C)hi, Alison Murray, MD, CCFP, MPHj

Accepted 1 April 2009. published online 27 August 2009.

Abstract 

Understanding the complexities of distress and knowing who is most vulnerable is foundational to the provision of quality, palliative end-of-life care. Although prior studies have examined the prevalence of symptom distress among patients nearing death, these studies have tended to largely focus on physical and, to a lesser extent, psychological challenges. The aim of this study was to use the Patient Dignity Inventory (PDI), a novel, reliable, and validated measure of end-of-life distress, to describe a broad landscape of distress in patients who are terminally ill. The PDI, a 25-item self-report, was administered to 253 patients receiving palliative care. Each PDI item is rated by patients to indicate the degree to which they experience various kinds of end-of-life distress. Palliative care patients reported an average of 5.74 problems (standard deviation, 5.49; range, 0–24), including physical, psychological, existential, and spiritual challenges. Being an inpatient, being educated, and having a partner were associated with certain kinds of end-of-life problems, particularly existential distress. Spirituality, especially its existential or “sense of meaning and purpose” dimension, was associated with less distress for terminally ill patients. A better appreciation for the nature of distress is a critical step toward a fuller understanding of the challenges facing the terminally ill. A clear articulation of the landscape of distress, including insight regarding those who are most at risk, should pave the way toward more effective, dignity-conserving end-of-life care.

a Manitoba Palliative Care Research Unit, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

b Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

c Faculty of Nursing, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

d Manitoba Palliative Care Research Unit, CancerCare Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

e Patient and Family Support Services, CancerCare Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

f Western Australian Centre for Cancer & Palliative Care, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia

g St. Boniface General Hospital, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

h Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

i Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

j Calgary Health Region, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence to: Harvey Max Chochinov, MD, PhD, Manitoba Palliative Care Research Unit, University of Manitoba, CancerCare Manitoba, Rm. 3021, 675 McDermot Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3E 0V9, Canada.

 The work was supported by a grant from the National Cancer Institute of Canada, with funding from the Canadian Cancer Society. Dr. Chochinov is a Canada Research Chair in Palliative Care, funded by the Canadian Institutes for Health Research. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

PII: S0885-3924(09)00636-8

doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2009.04.021


View previous. 6 of 23 View next.