Zusammenfassung Hintergrund Chronischer Schmerz betrifft alle menschlichen Lebensdimensionen und wirft auch spirituelle Fragen auf, die im Rahmen eines multimodalen Behandlungsmodells berücksichtigt werden sollten. Ziel der Arbeit Wir untersuchten die Perspektive von Patienten mit chronischen Schmerzen zu spirituellen Themen und deren möglicher Integration in den Behandlungsprozess. Material und Methoden Es wurden fünf Fokusgruppen- und zwei Kleingruppeninterviews an fünf Studienzentren durchgeführt. Daran nahmen 42 Patienten mit chronischen Schmerzen teil, die aktuell in ambulanter oder stationärer Schmerzbehandlung waren. Die Interviews wurden transkribiert und einer thematischen Analyse unterzogen. Ergebnisse Drei Themen traten hervor: 1. Chronischer Schmerz durchdringt die gesamte menschliche Existenz. 2. Spirituelle Ressourcen stellen eine Möglichkeit im Umgang mit chronischen Schmerzen dar. 3. Patienten ist es ein Anliegen, mit Fachpersonen in einen Dialog treten zu können, der auch für spirituelle Themen offen ist. Diese haben aus Sicht der Teilnehmenden große Relevanz. Sie verknüpften sie vielfach, aber nicht ausschließlich mit religiösen Überzeugungen. Häufig wurde geschildert, in der Schmerzerfahrung nicht ernst genommen zu werden. Diskussion Strategien für einen effektiven Umgang mit chronischem Schmerz zu finden, stellt einen Wendepunkt im Leben dar. In diesem Prozess unterstützt ein offener Dialog mit Fachpersonen, der auch spirituellen Themen Rechnung trägt.

Background: An in-hospital death is a profound experience for those left behind and has been associated with family members’ psychological morbidity. Supporting bereaved family members is an essential part of end-of-life care and includes attentive presence, information-giving, and emotional and practical support. The actual adoption of hospital-based bereavement care, however, remains little understood. Aim: To investigate hospital-based bereavement care provision and associated barriers. Design: Cross-sectional survey using an online questionnaire. Setting/participants: Health professionals ( n = 196) from two University-affiliated acute and psychiatric hospitals in Switzerland. Results: The most frequent bereavement services (⩾40%) were viewing the deceased, giving information on available support, and making referrals; the most often named barriers were lack of time and organizational support. Acute care health professionals faced statistically significant more structural barriers (55.1% vs 21.4% lack of time, 47.8% vs 25.9% lack of organizational support) and felt insufficiently trained (38.4% vs 20.7%) compared to mental health professionals ( p ⩽ 0.05). Nurses provided more immediate services compared to physicians, such as viewing the deceased (71.3% vs 49.0%) and sending sympathy cards (37.4% vs 16.3%) ( p ⩽ 0.01). In contrast, physicians screened more often for complex bereavement disorders (10.2% vs 2.6%) and appraised bereavement care as beyond their role (26.5% vs 7.8%) ( p ⩽ 0.05). Conclusion: The study indicates that many barriers to bereavement care exist in hospitals. More research is required to better understand enabling and limiting factors to bereavement care provision. A guideline-driven approach to hospital-based bereavement care that defines best practice and required organizational support seems necessary to ensure needs-based bereavement care.

Background The spiritual aspect of care is an often neglected resource in pain therapies. The aim of this study is to identify commonalities and differences in chronic pain patients’ (CPP) and health care professionals’ (HCP) perceptions on the integration of spiritual care into multimodal pain therapy. Methods We conducted a qualitative exploratory study with 42 CPPs and 34 HCPs who were interviewed in 12 separate groups in five study centres specialising in chronic pain within German-speaking Switzerland. The interviews were transcribed and subjected to a qualitative content analysis. Findings were generated by juxtaposing and analysing the statements of (a) HCP about HCP, (b) HCP about CPP, (c) CPP about HCP, and (d) CPP about CPP. Results Views on spiritual concerns and needs in chronic pain care can be described in three distinct dimensions: function (evaluating the need / request to discuss spiritual issues), structure (evaluating when / how to discuss spiritual issues) and context (evaluating why / under which circumstances to discuss spiritual issues). CPPs stress the importance of HCPs recognizing their overall human integrity, including the spiritual dimension, and would like to grant spiritual concerns greater significance in their therapy. HCPs express difficulties in addressing and discussing spiritual concerns and needs with chronic pain patients. Both parties want clarification of the context in which the spiritual dimension could be integrated into treatment. They see a need for greater awareness and training of HCPs in how the spiritual dimension in therapeutic interactions might be addressed. Conclusions Although there are similarities in the perspectives of HCPs and CPPs regarding spiritual concerns and needs in chronic pain care, there are relevant differences between the two groups. This might contribute to the neglect of the spiritual dimension in the treatment of chronic pain. Trial registration This study was part of a larger research project, registered in a primary (clinicaltrial.gov: NCT03679871) and local (kofam.ch: SNCTP000003086) clinical trial registry.

Much has been written about WHO. Relatively little is known, however, about the organisation’s evolving relationship with health-related personal beliefs, ‘faith-based organisations’ (FBOs), religious leaders and religious communities (‘religious actors’). This article presents findings from a 4-year research project on the ‘spiritual dimension’ of health and WHO conducted at the University of Zürich. Drawing on archival research in Geneva and interviews with current and former WHO staff, consultants and programme partners, we identify three stages in this relationship. Although since its founding individuals within WHO occasionally engaged with religious actors, it was not until the 1970s, when the primary healthcare strategy was developed in consultation with the Christian Medical Commission, that their concerns began to influence WHO policies. By the early 1990s, the failure to roll out primary healthcare globally was accompanied by a loss of interest in religion within WHO. With the spread of HIV/AIDS however, health-related religious beliefs were increasingly recognised in the development of a major quality of life instrument by the Division of Mental Health, and the work of a WHO expert committee on cancer pain relief and the subsequent establishment of palliative care. While the 1990s saw a cooling off of activities, in the years since, the HIV/AIDS, Ebola and COVID-19 crises have periodically brought religious actors to the attention of the organisation. This study focusses on what we suggest may be understood as a trend towards a closer association between the activities of WHO and religious actors, which has occurred in fits and starts and is marked by attempts at institutional translation and periods of forgetting and remembering.

Since the beginning of the World Health Organization, many of its staff members, regional offices, Member States, and directors-general have grappled with the question of what a ‘spiritual dimension’ of health looks like, and how it might enrich the health policies advocated by their organization. Contrary to the widespread perception that ‘spirituality’ is primarily related to palliative care and has emerged relatively recently within the WHO, this book shows that its history is considerably longer and more complex, and has been closely connected to the organization’s ethical aspirations, its quest for more holistic and equitable healthcare, and its struggle with the colonial legacy of international health organizations. Such ideals and struggles silently motivated many of its key actors and policies—such as the provision of universal primary healthcare—which for decades have embodied the organization’s loftiest aspirations. The WHO’s official relationship with ‘spirituality’ advanced in fits, leaps, and setbacks. At times creative and interdisciplinary, at others deeply political, this process was marked by cycles of institutional forgetting and remembering. Rather than a triumph of religious lobbyists, this book argues, the ‘spiritual dimension’ of health may be better understood as a ‘ghost’ that has haunted—and continues to haunt—the WHO as it comes to terms with its mandate of advancing health as a state of ‘complete well-being’ available to all.