The Bereavement Risk Assessment Tool (BRAT) seems to be useful in identifying those who are likely to suffer from the more severe consequences of bereavement. To date, however, only a few studies have examined bereavement risk using the BRAT. This study investigated bereavement risk in family caregivers of patients with cancer using the Japanese version of the Bereavement Risk Assessment Tool (BRAT-J). We also investigated the relationship of bereavement risk with psychological distress and resilience among caregivers to determine the validity of the BRAT-J.

We conducted family psychoeducation in the palliative care unit of Tohoku University Hospital with participants who were recruited in this study. Among the participants, 50 family caregivers provided their written informed consent and were included in this study. Participants were assessed using the BRAT-J and completed the Japanese version of the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6) and the Tachikawa Resilience Scale (TRS).

According to the BRAT-J, five individuals (10%) were in the high category of bereavement risk (level 4 or 5). We also found that family caregivers of patients experienced many different pressures, such as facing the unknown; their own work; and insufficient financial, practical, or physical resources. These issues are associated with various mental problems. Additionally, the level of bereavement risk was significantly correlated with K6 scores (ρ = 0.30, p = 0.032), and the TRS score (ρ = –0.44, p = 0.001). These correlations confirmed previous findings and that the BRAT-J can be an efficient screening tool for the bereavement risk of family caregivers of patients with cancer.

It appears that the BRAT-J is useful in predicting the likelihood of difficulties or complications in bereavement for family caregivers and could help to provide support with these issues when needed.

The Bereavement Risk Assessment Tool (BRAT) was designed to consistently communicate information affecting bereavement outcomes; to predict the risk for difficult or complicated bereavement based on information obtained before the death; to consider resiliency as well as risk; and to assist in the efficacy and consistency of bereavement service allocation. Following initial development of the BRAT's 40 items and its clinical use, this study set out to test the BRAT for inter-rater reliability along with some basic validity measures.

Case studies were designed based on actual patients and families from a hospice palliative care program. Bereavement professionals were recruited via the internet. Thirty-six participants assessed BRAT items in 10 cases and then estimated one of 5 levels of risk for each case. These were compared with an expert group's assignment of risk.

Inter-rater reliability for the 5-level risk scores yielded a Fleiss’ kappa of 0.37 and an intra-class correlation (ICC) of 0.68 (95% CI 0.5-0.9). By collapsing scores into low and high risk groups, a kappa of 0.63 and an ICC of 0.66 (95% CI 0.5-0.9) was obtained. Participant-estimated risk scores yielded a kappa of 0.24. Although opinion varied on the tool's length, participants indicated it was well organized and easy to use with potential in assessment and allocation of bereavement services. Limitations of the study include a small sample size and the use of case studies. Limitations of the tool include the subjectivity of some items and ambiguousness of unchecked items.

The collapsed BRAT risk levels show moderately good inter-rater reliability over clinical judgement alone. This study provides introductory evidence of a tool that can be used both prior to and following a death and, in conjunction with professional judgment, can assess the likelihood of bereavement complications.