What role does spirituality play in late life

We all understand the importance of physical activity, eating well and keeping our minds engaged to help improve our overall health and well-being. But the link between spirituality and good health has been less clear. Science is beginning to take a closer look at spirituality’s role in health and aging. Several studies over the past few years have shown that as we grow older, we benefit from focusing our attention on beauty, the meaning of life, the things that connect us, and our place in the world, concepts often associated with spirituality.

What does it mean to be spiritual?

Spirituality is a very broad tent. To some, it means attending religious services regularly and practicing the traditions of an established religion. To others, it could mean simply being still and allowing the universe to speak to them in that silence – often referred to as meditation. However you define spirituality, it appears to have a positive effect on one’s health.

Science takes a look at the spiritual link to health

In a study conducted at the University of Missouri, researchers gathered people from different faith traditions – including Buddhists, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, and Protestants – to see if there were any differences in health outcomes. They discovered that increased spirituality was “significantly related” to better mental health, regardless of what form the spirituality took.

In a collaborative study between professors at Columbia University and the New York State Psychiatric Institute, researchers reported a direct correlation between the importance of spirituality in a person’s life and the thickness of their cerebral cortex – a part of the brain responsible for sensory perception, language and emotion processing.

An article published in Cancer, a journal of the American Cancer Society, looked at several published studies on the topic of spirituality’s effect on health and found a link between high levels of religious or spiritual beliefs and better physical health among patients with cancer.

Nontraditional spirituality

One of the most popular forms of nontraditional spirituality is meditation. Because of this, it is getting a lot of attention from the scientific community. A UCLA study found that people who meditated for an average of 20 years had greater brain volume that non-meditators. In a previous post, we discussed how mindfulness, a form of meditation, can help improve your health.

Meditation and dementia

Another study at UCLA discovered that a three-month course of yoga and meditation helped minimize the cognitive issues that often precede Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia – in fact, it was more effective than memory enhancement exercises in improving visual-spatial memory skills and decreasing depression and anxiety.

Increasing spirituality in your life

If you are a member of a religious organization and attend services regularly, you may not need any impetus to increase your spiritual participation. However, not all of us grew up in a religious tradition, so we may find it challenging to suddenly become “spiritual.” One of the easiest ways to reap the benefits of spirituality is simply to become still, which may be easier said than done for those of us who are Type A’s and feel that we’re not accomplishing anything unless we’re doing something. One of the easiest ways to become still is to focus on your breathing. Become conscious of each inhale and exhale. Start to breathe in more deeply. Get to the point where the length of the inhale and exhale are approximately the same. As your breathing becomes balanced, your mind becomes balanced. By focusing on your breath, you’ll discover that the mind shuts off, giving it – and your entire body – a chance to rejuvenate. You’ll go from a human doing to a human being. There are many resources available to help newcomers to meditation – phone apps, websites, and even Meditation Meetups for those who like group activities.

Taking care of ourselves spiritually can help us approach life more positively and build a resilience that can help us through many of life’s challenges, helping us to age more healthfully.

  1. Paúl MC, da Fonseca AM. Psicossociologia da saúde. Lisboa: Climepsi; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  2. WHOQoL Group. The World Health Organization quality of life assessment (WHOQOL): position paper from the World Health Organization. Soc Sci Med 1995, 41(10): 1403–1409.

  3. Fleck MDA. Problemas conceituais em qualidade de vida. A avaliação de qualidade de vida: guia para profissionais da saúde. Porto Alegre: Artmed, 2008, 19–28.

  4. Malone J, Dadswell A. The role of religion, spirituality and/or belief in positive ageing for older adults. Geriatrics. 2018;3(2):28.

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. INE (2012). Censos 2011. Disponível em https://www.ine.pt/xportal/xmain?xpid=INE&xpgid=ine_indicadores&indOcorrCod=0006396&contexto=bd&selTab=tab2&xlang=pt.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Teixeira A, Vilaça H, Moniz JB, Coutinho JP, Franca MF. Identidades religiosas na área metropolitana de Lisboa: FFMS: Lisboa; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Büssing A. Spirituality as a resource to rely on in chronic illness: the SpREUK questionnaire. Religions. 2010;1(1):9–17.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chen YH, Lin LC, Chuang LL, Chen ML. The relationship of Physiopsychosocial factors and spiritual well-being in elderly residents: implications for evidence-based practice. Worldviews Evid-Based Nurs. 2017;14(6):484–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Abu HO, Ulbricht C, Ding E, Allison JJ, Salmoirago-Blotcher E, Goldberg RJ, Kiefe CI. Association of religiosity and spirituality with quality of life in patients with cardiovascular disease: a systematic review. Qual Life Res. 2018;27(11):2777–97.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Del Rio CM, White LJ. Separating spirituality from religiosity: a hylomorphic attitudinal perspective. Psychol Relig Spiritual. 2012;4(2):123.

    Google Scholar 

  11. de Assis CL, Gomes JM, Zentarski LDOF. Religiosidade e qualidade de vida na terceira idade: uma revisão bibliográfica a partir da produção científica. REVER-Revista de Estudos da Religião. 2013;13(2):119–48.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Cohen HL, Thomas CL, Williamson C. Religion and spirituality as defined by older adults. J Gerontol Soc Work. 2018;51(3–4):284–99.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Shaw R, Gullifer J, Wood K. Religion and spirituality: a qualitative study of older adults. Ageing Int. 2016;41(3):311–30.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chokkanathan S. Religiosity and well-being of older adults in Chennai, India. Aging & mental health.2013; 17(7): 880–887.

  15. Lucchetti G, Lucchetti ALG, Peres MF, Leão FC, Moreira-Almeida A, Koenig HG. Validation of the duke religion index: DUREL (Portuguese version). J Relig Spiritual Aging. 2012;51(2):579–86.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gallardo-Peralta LP. The relationship between religiosity/spirituality, social support, and quality of life among elderly Chilean people. Int Soc Work. 2017;60(6):1498–511.

    Google Scholar 

  17. de Oliveira RM, Alves VP. A qualidade de vida dos idosos a partir da influência da religiosidade e da espiritualidade: cuidados prestados aos idosos institucionalizados em Caetité (BA). Revista Kairós: Gerontologia. 2014;17(3):305–27.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Costa DC, Sá MJ, Calheiros JM. Rede de apoio social e qualidade de vida de pacientes com esclerose múltipla. Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria.2017;75(5): 267–271.

  19. White AM, Philogene GS, Fine L, Sinha S. Social support and self-reported health status of older adults in the United States. Am J Public Health. 2009;99(10):1872–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Unsar S, Erol O, Sut N. Social support and quality of life among older adults. Int J Caring Sci. 2016;9(1):249–57.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Santos CSVDB, Ribeiro JLP, Lopes C. Estudo de adaptação da Escala de Satisfação com o Suporte Social (ESSS) a pessoas com diagnóstico de doença oncológica. Psicologia, Saúde & Doenças. 2003;4(2):185–204.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Mahmoud AS, Berma AE, Gabal SAAS. Relationship between social support and the quality of life among psychiatric patients. Journal of Psychiatry and Psychiatric Disorders. 2017;1(2):57–75.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lima S, Gago M, Garrett C, Pereira MG. Predictors and moderators of quality of life in Alzheimer’s disease patients. J Alzheimers Dis. 2016;54(3):1113–21.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Şahin DS, Özer Ö, Yanardağ MZ. Perceived social support, quality of life and satisfaction with life in elderly people. Educ Gerontol. 2019;45(1):69–77.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the Barthel index. Maryland State Medical Journal. 1965;14:61–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Araújo F, Ribeiro JLP, Oliveira A, Pinto C. Validação do Índice de Barthel numa amostra de idosos não institucionalizados. [validation of Barthel index in a portuguese sample of erderly persons not institutionalized]. Rev. port. Sau. Pub. 2007;25(2):59–66.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Büssing A, Ostermann T, Matthiessen PF. Role of religion and spirituality in medical patients: confirmatory results with the SpREUK questionnaire. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004;3(10):1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Pereira MG, Vilaça M, Pedras S, Vieira S, Lima S. Validation of the spiritual and religious attitudes in dealing with illness (SpREUK) in Portuguese Alzheimer‘s patients. J Relig Spiritual Aging. 2019;2019:1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ribeiro JLP. Escala de Satisfação com o Suporte Social (ESSS). Análise Psicológica. 1999;3(17):547–58.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ware JE, Keller SD, Gandek B, Brazier JE, Sullivan M. Evaluating translations of health status questionnaires. Methods from the IQOLA project. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1995;1(3):525–51.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Ferreira PL. Criação da versão Portuguesa do MOS SF-36: Parte I – Adaptação cultural e linguística. Acta Medica Port. 2000;13:55–63.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Ferreira PL, Ferreira LN, Pereira LN. Medidas sumário física e mental de estado de saúde para a população portuguesa. Revista Portuguesa de Saúde Pública. 2012;30(2):163–71.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. NewYork, NY: Guilford Press; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen M. Evaluating model fit: a synthesis of the structural equation modelling literature. In 7th European Conference on research methodology for business and management studies. 2008, (pp. 195–200).

  35. Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J. 1999;6(1):1–55.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Preacher KJ, Kelley K. Effect size measures for mediation models: quantitative strategies for communicating indirect effects. Psychol Methods. 2011;16(2):93–115.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Braga IB, Braga EB, de Araújo Oliveira MC, Guedes JD. A percepção do Idoso sobre a Saúde e Qualidade de Vida na Terceira Idade. Id on Line Revista de Psicologia. 2015;9(26):211–22.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Word Health Organization. World Health Statistics 2017: Monitoring health for the SDGs 2017 https://www.who.int/gho/publications/world_health_statistics/2017/en/. .

  39. Soares ADSF, Amorim, MISPL. Qualidade de vida e espiritualidade em pessoas idosas institucionalizadas. Revista Portuguesa de Enfermagem de Saúde Mental, (SPE2). 2015;45–51.

  40. Dawalibi NW, Goulart RMM, Prearo LC. Fatores relacionados à qualidade de vida de idosos em programas para a terceira idade. Ciência e Saúde Coletiva. 2014;19(8):3505–12.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Sorond FA, Cruz-Almeida Y, Clark DJ, Viswanathan A, Scherzer CR, De Jager P, Csiszar A, Laurienti PJ, Hausdorff JM, Chen WG, Ferrucci L. Aging, the central nervous system, and mobility in older adults: neural mechanisms of mobility impairment. J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 2015; 18;70(12):1526–32.

  42. Gonçalves LC, de Souza Vale RG, Barata NJF, Varejão RV, Dantas EHM. Flexibility, functional autonomy and quality of life (QoL) in elderly yoga practitioners. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2011;53(2):158–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Pernambuco CS, Rodrigues BM, Bezerra JC, Carrielo A, Fernandes AD, Vale R, Dantas E. Quality of life, elderly and physical activity. Health. 2012; 1;4(2):88–93.

  44. Newsom JT, Schulz R. Social support as a mediator in the relation between functional status and quality of life in older adults. Psychology and aging.1996;11(1):34–39.

  45. Wedgeworth M, LaRocca MA, Chaplin WF, Scogin F. The role of interpersonal sensitivity, social support, and quality of life in rural older adults. Geriatr Nurs. 2017;38(1):22–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Rashedi V, Gharib M, Yazdani AA. Social participation and mental health among older adults in Iran. Iran J Public Health. 2014;12(1):9–13.

    Google Scholar 

  47. DuPertuis LL, Aldwin CM, Bossé R. Does the source of support matter for different health outcomes? Findings from the normative aging study. J Aging Health. 2001;13(4):494–510.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Krzepota J, Biernat E, Florkiewicz B. The relationship between levels of physical activity and quality of life among students of the university of the third age. Cent Eur J Public Health. 2015;23(4):335–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Ludendorff Queiroz L, Silveira de Brito C, Gomes de Almeida F, Martins Pereira N, de Almeida Silva H, Pena Porto J, ... & Marques Ribas R. Quality of life and impact of physical activity time in the health of elderly. Rev Fac Ciênc Méd Sorocaba 2016, 18(1):24–29.

  50. Wang HX, Jin Y, Hendrie HC, Liang C, Yang L, Cheng Y, Unverzagt FW, Ma F, Hall KS, Murrell JR, Li P. Late life leisure activities and risk of cognitive decline. Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biomedical Sciences and Medical Sciences. 2012;68(2):205–13.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Hutchinson SL, Nimrod G. Leisure as a resource for successful aging by older adults with chronic health conditions. Int J Aging Hum Dev. 2012;74(1):41–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. República Portuguesa, Serviço Nacional de Saúde: Estratégia para o Envelhecimento Saudável e Ativo, 2017–2025. República Portuguesa, 2017.

    Google Scholar 


Page 2

Skip to main content

From: Spirituality and quality of life in older adults: a path analysis model

Categorical variables %(n)
Gender (female) 63.6(384)
Marital Status
 Single 6.6(40)
 Married 67.2(406)
 Divorced 1.2(7)
 Widow 25.0(151)
Education Level
 Illiterate 4.6(28)
 1 a 4 years 92.7(560)
 5 a 12 years 2.5(14)
  > 12 years 0.3(2)
Co-habitation status
 Partner 57.0(343)
 Nuclear Family 22.3(134)
 Extended family 3.2(19)
 Institution / Senior Residence 0.8(5)
 Alone 9.1(55)
 Alone with assistance neighbour 1.5(9)
 Alone with support of institution 3.2(19)
 Alone without help 3.0(18)
Clinical variables
 Presence of chronic disease (yes) 72.0(435)
 Prescription of chronic medication (yes) 87.1(526)
Continuous variable M (SD)
Age 71.60(4.81)
Min-Max 65–94