Background: The EAPC White Paper addresses the issue of spiritual care education for all palliative care professionals. It is to guide health care professionals involved in teaching or training of palliative care and spiritual care; stakeholders, leaders and decision makers responsible for training and education; as well as national and local curricula development groups.Methods: Early in 2018, preliminary draft paper was written by members of the European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) spiritual care reference group inviting comment on the four core elements of spiritual care education as outlined by Gamondi et al. (2013) in their paper on palliative care core competencies. The preliminary draft paper was circulated to experts from the EAPC spiritual care reference group for feedback. At the second stage feedback was incorporated into a second draft paper and experts and representatives of national palliative care organizations were invited to provide feedback and suggest revisions. The final version incorporated the subsequent criticism and as a result, the Gamondi framework was explored and critically revised leading to updated suggestions for spiritual care education in palliative care.Results: The EAPC white paper points out the importance of spiritual care as an integral part of palliative care and suggests incorporating it accordingly into educational activities and training models in palliative care. The revised spiritual care education competencies for all palliative care providers are accompanied by the best practice models and research evidence, at the same time being sensitive towards different development stages of the palliative care services across the European region.Conclusions: Better education can help the healthcare practitioner to avoid being distracted by their own fears, prejudices, and restraints and attend to the patient and his/her family. This EAPC white paper encourages and facilitates high quality, multi-disciplinary, academically and financially accessible spiritual care education to all palliative care staff.

Background: Discussion of religion and/or spirituality in the medical consultation is desired by patients and known to be beneficial. However, it is infrequent. We aimed to identify why this is so. Aim: We set out to answer the following research questions: Do doctors report that they ask their patients about religion and/or spirituality and how do they do it? According to doctors, how often do patients raise the issue of religion and/or spirituality in consultation and how do doctors respond when they do? What are the known facilitators and barriers to doctors asking their patients about religion and/or spirituality? Design: A mixed qualitative/quantitative review was conducted to identify studies exploring the physician’s perspective on discussion of religion and/or spirituality in the medical consultation. Data sources: We searched nine databases from inception to January 2015 for original research papers reporting doctors’ views on discussion of religion and/or spirituality in medical consultations. Papers were assessed for quality using QualSyst and results were reported using a measurement tool to assess systematic review guidelines. Results: Overall, 61 eligible papers were identified, comprising over 20,044 physician reports. Religion and spirituality are discussed infrequently by physicians although frequency increases with terminal illness. Many physicians prefer chaplain referral to discussing religion and/or spirituality with patients themselves. Such discussions are facilitated by prior training and increased physician religiosity and spirituality. Insufficient time and training were the most frequently reported barriers. Conclusion: This review found that physician enquiry into the religion and/or spirituality of patients is inconsistent in frequency and nature and that in order to meet patient needs, barriers to discussion need to be overcome.

Objectives The importance of ‘whole person’ or ‘holistic’ care is widely recognised, particularly with an increasing prevalence of chronic multimorbidity internationally. This approach to care is a defining feature of general practice. However, its precise meaning remains ambiguous. We aimed to determine how the term ‘whole person’ care is understood by general practitioners (GPs), and whether it is synonymous with ‘[w]holistic’ and ‘biopsychosocial’ care. Design Systematic literature review. Methods MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Proquest Dissertations and Theses, Science.gov (Health and Medicine database), Google Scholar and included studies’ reference lists were searched with an unlimited date range. Systematic or literature reviews, original research, theoretical articles or books/book chapters; specific to general practice; relevant to the research question; and published in English were included. Included literature was critically appraised, and data were extracted and analysed using thematic synthesis. Results Fifty publications were included from 4297 non-duplicate records retrieved. Six themes were identified: a multidimensional, integrated approach; the importance of the therapeutic relationship; acknowledging doctors’ humanity; recognising patients’ individual personhood; viewing health as more than absence of disease; and employing a range of treatment modalities. Whole person, biopsychosocial and holistic terminology were often used interchangeably, but were not synonymous. Conclusions Whole person, holistic and biopsychosocial terminology are primarily characterised by a multidimensional approach to care and incorporate additional elements described above. Whole person care probably represents the closest representation of the basis for general practice. Health systems aiming to provide whole person care need to address the challenge of integrating the care of other health professionals, and maintaining the patient–doctor relationship central to the themes identified. Further research is required to clarify the representativeness of the findings, and the relative importance GPs’ assign to each theme. PROSPERO registration number CRD42017058824.