Fitchett George, Murphy Patricia, King Stephen D W
a Department of Religion, Health and Human Values , Rush University Medical Center , Chicago , Illinois , USA.
b Seattle Cancer Care Alliance , Seattle , Washington , USA.
J Health Care Chaplain. 2017 Jul-Sep;23(3):98-112. doi: 10.1080/08854726.2017.1294861. Epub 2017 Apr 3.
Effective deployment of limited spiritual care resources requires valid and reliable methods of screening that can be used by nonchaplain health care professionals to identify and refer patients with potential religious/spiritual (R/S) need. Research regarding the validity of existing approaches to R/S screening is limited. In a sample of 1,399 hematopoietic stem cell transplant survivors, we tested the validity of the Rush Protocol and two alternative versions of it. The negative religious coping subscale of the Brief RCOPE provided the reference standard. Based on the Protocol, 21.9% of the survivors were identified as having potential R/S struggle. The sensitivity of the Protocol was low (42.1%) and the specificity was marginally acceptable (81.3%). The sensitivity and specificity of the two alternative versions were similar to those for the unmodified Protocol. Further research with the Rush Protocol, and other models, should be pursued to develop the best evidence-based approaches to R/S screening.
有效部署有限的精神关怀资源需要有效且可靠的筛查方法，以便非牧师医疗保健专业人员能够识别并转诊有潜在宗教/精神需求的患者。关于现有宗教/精神筛查方法有效性的研究有限。在1399名造血干细胞移植幸存者的样本中，我们测试了拉什筛查方案及其两个替代版本的有效性。简易宗教应对量表（Brief RCOPE）中的消极宗教应对分量表提供了参考标准。根据该方案，21.9%的幸存者被确定为有潜在的宗教/精神困扰。该方案的敏感性较低（42.1%），特异性勉强可以接受（81.3%）。两个替代版本的敏感性和特异性与未修改方案的相似。应进一步研究拉什筛查方案和其他模型，以开发基于最佳证据的宗教/精神筛查方法。
