We previously developed a 24-item Terminal Delirium-Related Distress Scale (TDDS) to evaluate patient and family distress due to terminal delirium. However, a scale with fewer evaluation items was needed to reduce the burden on terminally ill patients and their families. Thus, the TDDS Shortform (TDDS-SF) was developed, and the validity and reliability of the scale were evaluated.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the validity and reliability of TDDS-SF.

Items with insufficient loading (<0.6) based on factor analysis were removed from the TDDS. Palliative care experts reviewed each item and checked the structure of the scale. Based on their feedback, we developed the TDDS-SF, a 15-item questionnaire consisting of 4 subscales, including “Care for the family,” “Ability to communicate,” “Psychiatric symptoms,” and “Adequate information and discussion about treatment for delirium.” A cross-sectional, self-completed questionnaire survey of bereaved families of cancer patients who were admitted to a hospice/palliative care unit was conducted in August 2018. The survey included the TDDS-SF, Good Death Inventory (GDI), Care Evaluation Scale (CES), and distress score in the Delirium Experience Questionnaire. The validity, including construct validity, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and internal consistency, and reliability, including the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for internal consistency, of the TDDS-SF were evaluated.

The study included 366 bereaved family members. Factor analysis revealed good construct validity. Convergent validity was demonstrated based on good correlations with the CES (r = − 0.54, P < 0.001) and the GDI (r = − 0.54, P < 0.001). Discriminant validity was demonstrated by a low correlation (r = 0.23, P < 0.001) with the distress scores of bereaved families. The internal consistency was also good (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.70–0.94).

The TDDS-SF is a valid and feasible tool for assessing irreversible terminal delirium-related distress. A study targeting patients and their families with end-of-life delirium is planned for the near future.

This study aimed to validate the Japanese versions of the Trust in Oncologist Scale (TiOS-J) and the TiOS-Short Form (TiOS-SF-J).

A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted among cancer patients in Japan. The forward-backward translation method was used to develop the TiOS-J. The web-based survey was mailed to 633 people, of whom 309 responded. After 2 weeks, 103 among the 156 first-time respondents completed the second survey to verify the reliability of the retest method. The validity was evaluated by exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Spearman’s correlation coefficients between the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire-Japanese, willingness to recommend the oncologist, trust in health care, and number of oncological consultations. To evaluate reliability, Cronbach’s α and test–retest correlation were calculated.

The theoretically driven four-factor model and the EFA-driven one-factor model of the full-form TiOS-J (18 items) did not result in an acceptable fit; however, CFA supported the one-dimensionality of the 5 items from the TiOS-SF-J (χ2 (5) = 12.36, p = 0.03, goodness-of-fit index = 0.984, adjusted goodness-of-fit index = 0.952, comparative fit index = 0.991, and root mean square error of approximation = 0.069). With regard to the reliability of TiOS-J and TiOS-SF-J, the Cronbach’s alpha values were 0.94 and 0.89, respectively; the test–retest values were 0.82 and 0.78.

This study indicated that the TiOS-J and TiOS-SF-J are valid and reliable instruments for measuring patients’ trust in their oncologists and can be used to assess trust in oncologists for both clinical and research purposes.

It has been suggested that psychosocial factors are related to survival time of inpatients with cancer. However, there are not many studies examining the relationship between spiritual well-being (SWB) and survival time among countries. This study investigated the relationship between SWB and survival time among three East Asian countries.

This international multicenter cohort study is a secondary analysis involving newly admitted inpatients with advanced cancer in palliative care units in Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. SWB was measured using the Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale (IPOS) at admission. We performed multivariate analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model to identify independent prognostic factors.

A total of 2,638 patients treated at 37 palliative care units from January 2017 to September 2018 were analyzed. The median survival time was 18.0 days (95% confidence interval [CI] 16.5–19.5) in Japan, 23.0 days (95% CI 19.9–26.1) in Korea, and 15.0 days (95% CI 13.0–17.0) in Taiwan. SWB was a significant factor correlated with survival in Taiwan (hazard ratio [HR] 1.27; 95% CI 1.01–1.59; p = 0.04), while it was insignificant in Japan (HR 1.10; 95% CI 1.00–1.22; p = 0.06), and Korea (HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.77–1.35; p = 0.89).

SWB on admission was associated with survival in patients with advanced cancer in Taiwan but not Japan or Korea. The findings suggest the possibility of a positive relationship between spiritual care and survival time in patients with far advanced cancer.

Accurate prognostication is important for patients and their families to prepare for the end of life. Objective Prognostic Score (OPS) is an easy-to-use tool that does not require the clinicians’ prediction of survival (CPS), whereas Palliative Prognostic Score (PaP) needs CPS. Thus, inexperienced clinicians may hesitate to use PaP. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of OPS compared with PaP in inpatients in palliative care units (PCUs) in three East Asian countries.

This study was a secondary analysis of a cross-cultural, multicenter cohort study. We enrolled inpatients with far-advanced cancer in PCUs in Japan, Korea, and Taiwan from 2017 to 2018. We calculated the area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUROC) curve to compare the accuracy of OPS and PaP.

A total of 1,628 inpatients in 33 PCUs in Japan and Korea were analyzed. OPS and PaP were calculated in 71.7% of the Japanese patients and 80.0% of the Korean patients. In Taiwan, PaP was calculated for 81.6% of the patients. The AUROC for 3-week survival was 0.74 for OPS in Japan, 0.68 for OPS in Korea, 0.80 for PaP in Japan, and 0.73 for PaP in Korea. The AUROC for 30-day survival was 0.70 for OPS in Japan, 0.71 for OPS in Korea, 0.79 for PaP in Japan, and 0.74 for PaP in Korea.

Both OPS and PaP showed good performance in Japan and Korea. Compared with PaP, OPS could be more useful for inexperienced physicians who hesitate to estimate CPS.

There is no widely used prognostic model for delirium in patients with advanced cancer. The present study aimed to develop a decision tree prediction model for a short-term outcome.

This is a secondary analysis of a multicenter and prospective observational study conducted at 9 psycho-oncology consultation services and 14 inpatient palliative care units in Japan. We used records of patients with advanced cancer receiving pharmacological interventions with a baseline Delirium Rating Scale Revised-98 (DRS-R98) severity score of ≥10. A DRS-R98 severity score of <10 on day 3 was defined as the study outcome. The dataset was randomly split into the training and test dataset. A decision tree model was developed using the training dataset and potential predictors. The area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve was measured both in 5-fold cross-validation and in the independent test dataset. Finally, the model was visualized using the whole dataset.

Altogether, 668 records were included, of which 141 had a DRS-R98 severity score of <10 on day 3. The model achieved an average AUC of 0.698 in 5-fold cross-validation and 0.718 (95% confidence interval, 0.627–0.810) in the test dataset. The baseline DRS-R98 severity score (cutoff of 15), hypoxia, and dehydration were the important predictors, in this order.

We developed an easy-to-use prediction model for the short-term outcome of delirium in patients with advanced cancer receiving pharmacological interventions. The baseline severity of delirium and precipitating factors of delirium were important for prediction.

The goal of palliative and supportive care is to improve patients’ quality of life (QoL). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are the gold standard for the assessment of QoL and symptoms; however, when self-reporting is complicated, PROMs are often substituted with proxy-reported outcome measures, such as clinician-reported outcome measures. The objective of this study was to assess the validity and reliability of the Japanese version of the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS) for staff (IPOS-Staff).

This multicenter, cross-sectional observational study was conducted concurrently with the validation of the IPOS for patients (IPOS-Patient). Japanese adult patients with cancer and their staff were recruited. We assessed the characteristics of the patients and staff members, missing values, prevalence, and total IPOS scores. For the analysis of criterion validity, intra-rater, and inter-rater reliability, we calculated intraclass correlations (ICCs).

One hundred and forty-three patients completed the IPOS-Patient, and 79 medical staff members completed the IPOS-Staff. The most common missing values from IPOS-Staff were Family Anxiety (3.5%) and Sharing Feelings (3.5%). Over half of the patients scored themselves moderate or worse for Poor Mobility, Anxiety, and Family Anxiety, while staff members scored patients moderate or worse for Weakness, Anxiety, and Family Anxiety. For criterion validity (patient–staff agreement) as well as intra-rater and inter-rater reliability, ICCs ranged from 0.114 (Sharing Feelings) to 0.826 (Nausea), 0.720 (Anxiety) to 0.933 (Nausea), and −0.038 (Practical Problems) to 0.830 (Nausea), respectively.

The IPOS-Staff is easy to respond to; it has fair validity and reliability for physical items but poor for psycho-social items. By defining the context and objectives of its use and interpretation, the IPOS-Staff can be a useful tool for measuring outcomes in adult patients with cancer who cannot complete self-evaluations.

The present study aims were (1) to identify the proportion of terminally ill cancer patients with desire for hastened death (DHD) receiving specialized palliative care, (2) to identify the reasons for DHD, and (3) to classify patients with DHD into some interpretable subgroups.

Advanced cancer patients admitted to 23 inpatients hospices/palliative care units in 2017 were enrolled. Data were prospectively obtained by the primarily responsible physicians. The presence/absence of DHD and reasons for DHD were recorded. A cluster analysis was performed to identify patterns of subgroups in patients with DHD.

Data from 971 patients, whose Richmond Agitation–Sedation Scale score at admission was zero and who died in palliative care units, were analyzed. The average age was 72 years, common primary cancer sites were the gastrointestinal tract (31%) and the liver/biliary ducts/pancreas (19%). A total of 174 patients (18%: 95% confidence interval, 16–20) expressed DHD. Common reasons for DHD were dependency (45%), burden to others (28%), meaninglessness (24%), and inability to engage in pleasant activities (24%). We identified five clusters of patients with DHD: cluster 1 (35%, 61/173): “physical distress,” cluster 2 (21%, 37/173): “dependent and burdensome,” cluster 3 (19%, 33/173): “hopelessness,” cluster 4 (17%, 30/173): “profound fatigue,” and cluster 5 (7%, 12/173): “extensive existential suffering.”

A considerable number of patients expressed DHD and could be categorized into five subgroups. These findings may contribute to the development of therapeutic strategies.

There is no tool to appropriately assess terminal delirium, including the natural terminal course. The objective of this study was to develop an evaluation scale to assess distress from irreversible terminal delirium and to examine the validity of the scale.

Based on previous qualitative analysis and systematic literature searches, we carried out a survey regarding the views of bereaved families and developed a questionnaire. We extracted items that bereaved families regarded as important and constructed an evaluation scale of terminal delirium. Then, we applied the questionnaire in a cross-sectional questionnaire survey of bereaved relatives of cancer patients who were admitted to a hospice or a palliative care unit.

We developed the Terminal Delirium-Related Distress Scale (TDDS), a 24 item questionnaire consisting of five subscales (support for families and respect for a patient, ability to communicate, hallucinations and delusions, adequate information about the treatment of delirium, and agitation and restlessness). Two hundred and eighty-one bereaved relatives participated in the validation phase. The construct validity was shown to be good by repeated factor analysis. Convergent validity, confirmed by the correlation between the TDDS and the Care Evaluation Scale (r = 0.651, P < 0.001), was also good. The TDDS had good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha coefficient for all 24 items = 0.84).

This study showed that the TDDS is a valid and feasible measure of irreversible terminal delirium.

To obtain preliminary knowledge to design a randomized controlled trial to clarify the effects of spiritual care using the Spiritual Pain Assessment Sheet (SpiPas).

The study was designed as a nonrandomized controlled trial. The study took place between January 2015 and July 2015 in a hematology and oncology ward and two palliative care units in Japan. Among 54 eligible patients with advanced cancer, 46 were recruited (24 in the control group vs. 22 in the intervention group). The intervention group received spiritual care using SpiPas and usual care; the control group received usual care. The primary outcome was the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual (FACIT-Sp). The secondary outcomes were the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Comprehensive Quality of Life Outcome (CoQoLo).

A total of 33 (72%) and 23 (50%) patients completed 2- and 3-week follow-up evaluations, respectively. The differences in the changes during 2 weeks in total scores of FACIT-Sp and HADS were significant (95% confidence intervals, 3.65, 14.4, p < 0.01; –11.2 to –1.09, p = .02, respectively). No significant changes were observed in the total score of CoQoLo.

Spiritual care using the SpiPas might be useful for improving patient spiritual well-being. This controlled clinical trial could be performed and a future clinical trial is promising if outcomes are obtained within 2 weeks.

This study explores the views of healthcare professionals regarding care and treatment goals in irreversible terminal delirium and their effect on patients and caregivers.

We conducted a qualitative interview study of healthcare professionals (palliative care physician, oncologist, psycho-oncologist, and clinical psychologist) engaged in the treatment of terminally ill cancer patients. We assessed the views of healthcare workers regarding treatment goals in terminal delirium and their effect on patients and their families.

Of the 21 eligible healthcare professionals, 20 agreed to participate in this study. Three of the professionals had experience with treating terminal delirium as family caregivers. We identified five important aspects of treatment goals in terminal delirium based on the views of healthcare professionals: (1) adequate management of symptoms/distress, (2) ability to communicate, (3) continuity of self, (4) provision of care and support to families, and (5) considering a balance (between symptom alleviation and maintaining communication; between symptom alleviation and family preparations for the death of patients; balance between specific treatment goals for delirium and general treatment goals).

According to the views of healthcare workers questioned in this study, goals of care and treatment in terminal delirium are multidimensional and extend beyond simply controlling patient symptoms.

The aim of this study was to clarify, using a nationwide survey, what is perceived as necessary knowledge and skills for psychologists involved in cancer palliative care in Japan, the expectations of medical staff members, and the degree to which these expectations are met.

We conducted a questionnaire survey of psychologists involved in cancer palliative care. A total of 419 psychologists from 403 facilities were asked to fill out the questionnaire and return it anonymously. Some 401 psychologists (89 males, 310 females, and 2 unspecified; mean age, 37.2  ±  9.5 years) responded about necessary knowledge and skills for psychologists working in cancer palliative care, the necessity for training, expectations at their current workplace, and the degree to which expectations are met.

More than 90% of participants responded that many kinds of knowledge and skills related to the field of cancer palliative care are necessary. Over 80% of participants indicated a necessity for training related to these knowledge and skills. Although more than 50% (range, 50.1–85.8%) of participants responded that such services as “cooperation with medical staff within a hospital,” “handling patients for whom psychological support would be beneficial,” and “assessment of patients' mental state” were expected at their workplace, fewer than 60% (31.4–56.9%) responded that they actually performed these roles.

Our results show that many psychologists in cancer palliative care feel unable to respond to the expectations at their current workplace and that they require more adequate knowledge and skills related to cancer palliative care to work effectively. No other nationwide surveys have generated this type of information in Japan, so we believe that the results of our study are uniquely important.

The primary end points of this analysis were to explore 1) the practices of prognostic disclosure for patients with cancer and their family members in Japan, 2) the person who decided on the degree of prognosis communication, and 3) family evaluations of the type of prognostic disclosure.

Semistructured face-to-face interviews were conducted with 60 bereaved family members of patients with cancer who were admitted to palliative care units in Japan.

Twenty-five percent of patients and 75% of family members were informed of the predicted survival time of the patient. Thirty-eight percent of family members answered that they themselves decided on to what degree to communicate the prognosis to patients and 83% of them chose not to disclose to patients their prognosis or incurability. In the overall evaluation of prognosis communication, 30% of the participants said that they regretted or felt doubtful about the degree of prognostic disclosure to patients, whereas 37% said that they were satisfied with the degree of prognostic disclosure and 5% said that they had made a compromise. Both in the “prognostic disclosure” group and the “no disclosure” group, there were family members who said that they regretted or felt doubtful (27% and 31%, respectively) and family members who said that they were satisfied with the degree of disclosure (27% and 44%, respectively).

In conclusion, family members assume the predominant role as the decision-making source regarding prognosis disclosure to patients, and they often even prevent prognostic disclosure to patients. From the perspective of family members, any one type of disclosure is not necessarily the most acceptable choice. Future surveys should explore the reasons why family members agree or disagree with prognostic disclosures to patients and factors correlated with family evaluations.

Although the Short-Term Life Review elevated the spiritual well-being of terminally ill cancer patients in our previous study, we have not examined what patients reviewed for each question item of it. We examined factors in narratives to questions in the Short-Term Life Review interviews of terminally ill cancer patients and utility of the questions.

Thirty-four terminally ill cancer patients received the Short-Term Life Review interview in which there were two sessions. In the first session patients reviewed their lives, and an interviewer made a simple album of the patient based on patients' narrative. After 1 week, there was a second session. Qualitative analysis was conducted on patients' answers to each question using computational word mining, and factors were identified.

Twenty patients' narratives were analyzed. “Human relationships” was identified under “important things in life.” “Pleasant memories” were associated with “impressive memories.” “Illness” and “marriage and divorce” were related to “turning points in the life.” “Raising children and education” and “company or work” were identified as “roles in life.” “Achievements at work” were identified with “pride.” “Message to my children” was identified with “what I want to say to my family.” “To live sincerely” and “consideration for others” were identified as “advice for the next generation.” Patients reviewed few for topics such as “pride,” “what I want to say to my family,” “advice for the next generation,” and “summing up my life.”

Factors such as human relationships, raising children, and education as a role and source of pride, and concerns about children's future, were associated with elevating spiritual well-being. Question to which that patients easily answered were selected.

The aim of this study was to investigate the primary concerns of terminally ill cancer patients in a Short-Term Life Review among Japanese, Koreans, and Americans to develop intervention programs to be tailored to patients in other countries.

Twenty Japanese, 16 Korean, and 7 American terminally ill cancer patients who were in the hospice wards of general Christian hospitals in each country participated in this study. Medical staff members (nurses, social workers, clinical psychologists) performed Short-Term Life Review Interviews with each patient. Patients reviewed their lives in the first session, the interviewers made simple albums for each patient in the week following the first session, and patients and interviewers then confirmed the contents of the album. The treatment period was 1 week. Measurement instruments included the Functional Assessment Chronic Illness Therapy–Spiritual (FACIT-Sp) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). The contents of each interview session were transcribed, and correspondence analysis and a significance test were conducted on these data to select characteristic words or phrases.

Using the FACIT-Sp scores, the following concerns were chosen, in descending order of frequency. In Japan, primary concerns consisted of such ideas as “good human relationships and transcendence,” “achievements and satisfaction,” “good memories and important things,” and “bitter memories.” In Korea, “religious life,” “right behavior for living,” “strong consideration for children and will,” and “life for living” were primary concerns. In the United States, “love, pride, will to children,” “good, sweet memories,” and “regret and a feeling of loss” were primary concerns.

We clarify the differences among the primary concerns from the Short-Term Life Reviews, arguing that we can improve the spiritual well-being of terminally ill cancer patients by focusing on the primary concerns within each country.

The present study investigated what types of transformation terminally ill cancer patients experienced from diagnosis until the terminal stage, what meanings terminally ill cancer patients attributed to their illness, and whether or not those who attributed positive meaning to their illness achieved high levels of spiritual well-being as a preliminary study.

Ten terminally ill cancer patients in the hospice wards of two general hospitals participated. A clinical psychologist conducted a semistructured interview with the patients individually for about 60 min. Patients completed the FACIT-Sp and HADS before the interview and talked about the meanings of cancer experience. The contents of the interviews were analyzed qualitatively. Patients were separated into high and low levels of spiritual-well being by the median of FACIT-Sp scores.

Three types of transformation were extracted: “group with peaceful mind,” “group with both positive attitude and uneasy feeling,” and “groups with uneasy feeling.” As attributed meanings to the illness, five categories were extracted: “positive meaning,” “natural acceptance,” “negative acceptance,” “search for meaning,” and “regret and sorrow.” Patients in the high level spiritual well-being group attributed the meaning of illness to “positive meaning” and “natural acceptance,” and those in the low level spiritual well-being group attributed it to “regret and sorrow” and “search for meaning.”

Some Japanese terminally ill cancer patients experienced positive transformation, and patients who attributed “positive meaning” and “natural acceptance” to their illness experience achieved high levels of spiritual well-being.