Determining best methods to screen for religious/spiritual distress

• Published in: Supportive care in cancer 2017-02, Vol.25 (2), p.471-479
• Main Authors: King, Stephen D. W., Fitchett, George, Murphy, Patricia E., Pargament, Kenneth I., Harrison, David A., Loggers, Elizabeth Trice
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adaptation, Psychological; Adult; Aged; Cancer; Comparative analysis; Female; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation - mortality; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation - psychology; Hematopoietic stem cells; Humans; Male; Medical screening; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Methods; Middle Aged; Neoplasms - psychology; Nursing; Nursing Research; Oncology; Oncology, Experimental; Original Article; Pain Medicine; Psychological aspects; Psychometrics - methods; Rehabilitation Medicine; Religion; Religion and Psychology; Spirituality; Stem cells; Stress, Psychological - diagnosis; Stress, Psychological - psychology; Surveys; Survivors - psychology; Transplantation; Transplants & implants
• ISSN: 0941-4355; 1433-7339
• DOI: 10.1007/s00520-016-3425-6

Purpose This study sought to validate for the first time a brief screening measure for religious/spiritual (R/S) distress given the Commission on Cancer’s mandated screening for psychosocial distress including spiritual distress. Methods Data were collected in conjunction with an annual survey of adult hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) survivors. Six R/S distress screeners were compared to the Brief RCOPE, Negative Religious Coping subscale as the reference standard. We pre-specified validity as a sensitivity score of at least 85 %. As no individual measure attained this, two post hoc analyses were conducted: analysis of participants within 2 years of transplantation and of a simultaneous pairing of items. Data were analyzed from 1449 respondents whose time since HCT was 6 months to 40 years. Results For the various single-item screening protocols, sensitivity ranged from 27 (spiritual/religious concerns) to 60 % (meaning/joy) in the full sample and 25 (spiritual/religious concerns) to 65 % (meaning/joy) in a subsample of those within 2 years of HCT. The paired items of low meaning/joy and self-described R/S struggle attained a net sensitivity of 82 % in the full sample and of 87 % in those within 2 years of HCT but with low net specificities. Conclusions While no single-item screener was acceptable using our pre-specified sensitivity value of 85 %, the simultaneous use of meaning/joy and self-described struggle items among cancer survivors is currently the best choice to briefly screen for R/S distress. Future research should validate this and other approaches in active treatment cancer patients and survivors and determine the best times to screen.