Scoping review explores spiritual interventions improving well-being in family caregivers, suggesting tailored support.
Background Family caregivers often experience stress, which negatively affects their well-being, health, and quality of life. This review of current studies on spiritual and religious interventions and their effects will contribute to the development of holistic strategies to support family caregivers. Methods This scoping review followed Arksey and O’Malley’s framework and is reported in accordance with the modified Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guideline. A systematic search of studies and grey literature examining spiritual and/or religious interventions for family caregivers in the home setting was conducted across nine databases and Google Scholar. Results The search yielded 608 hits, of which 19 studies met the inclusion criteria; a total of 1,025 family caregivers are involved. Most studies have a quantitative design, examine the feasibility and pilot testing of the interventions, and are of moderate quality. Interventions include spiritual training and therapy, faith community nursing, yoga, meditation, mindfulness programs, and self-expressive therapies. These range from single-session approaches to programs lasting several weeks and are conducted as individual, dyadic, or group sessions, either in-person, by telephone, or via virtual platforms. Most studies report improvements in spiritual well-being, health, and quality of life. Some studies reported deterioration in physical health and increased fatigue following spiritual or religious interventions. Conclusion Spiritual or religious interventions can reduce stress among family caregivers and improve their well-being, provided they are tailored to their needs. To maximize their benefit, interventions should be tailored to caregivers’ needs, be flexible in timing and easily accessible, foster meaningful relationships, and be of sufficient duration to enable them to develop practical strategies for daily life.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kubitza et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: