Religious and non-religious coping in lung transplant candidates: does adding god to the picture tell us more?

Department of Allied Health Sciences, Medical School Wing E, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 27599-7205, USA.
Journal of Behavioral Medicine (Impact Factor: 3.1). 01/2006; 28(6):513-26. DOI: 10.1007/s10865-005-9025-4
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Individuals use many non-religious coping (NRC) and religious coping (RC) strategies to cope with stress. In previous studies with lung transplant candidates, we found that NRC and RC predicted depression, anxiety, and disability. The present study aimed to (a) assess whether RC and NRC contributed uniquely to the prediction of distress and disability, or whether they were redundant and offered no additional information, and (b) evaluate the unique contribution of each subscale to determine the strongest associations with outcomes. Participants were 81 patients with end-stage lung disease being evaluated for lung transplant. Our findings suggest that RC and NRC are not functionally redundant. The best RC predictor was reappraising the situation as a punishment from God, and the best NRC predictors were mental disengagement and denial. Our findings suggest that NRC and RC are independent components of psychological functioning, and measuring both coping styles provides more information than studying each alone.

  • Source
    International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 10/2014; 24(4):311-331. DOI:10.1080/10508619.2013.828993 · 1.64 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patients often rely on spirituality to cope with anxiety, yet it is not known if spiritual coping actually helps patients deal with anxiety. The present study was designed, therefore, to examine this relationship. A series of patients who were referred to the palliative care team at New York University, Langone Medical Center (N = 44) were interviewed about their spiritual coping and anxiety. Anxiety was measured using the first three items of the GAD-7. Fourteen items, which were adapted from existing scales, were used to create the "Beliefs and Activities Spirituality Scale" (BASS), having two subscales: Activities (α = .79) and Beliefs (α = .82). Anxiety had a significant negative correlations with the total BASS (r = -.56), and the Activities (r = -.52) and Beliefs (r = -.42) subscales. The salubrious association of spiritual coping and anxiety remained for the BASS and the Activities subscale, after controlling for demographic variables.
    Journal of Health Care Chaplaincy 10/2013; 19(4):131-9. DOI:10.1080/08854726.2013.823785
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A high level of unmet communication need exists amongst children with developmental disabilities in sub-Saharan Africa. This study investigated preliminary evidence of the impact associated with a home-based, caregiver-implemented intervention employing AAC methods, with nine children in rural Kenya who have complex communication needs. The intervention used mainly locally-sourced low-tech materials, and was designed to make use of the child's strengths and the caregiver's natural expertise. A pretest-posttest design was used in the study. Data were gathered using an adapted version of the Communication Profile, which was based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) framework. The non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-rank test was applied to data from the first two sections of the Communication Profile-Adapted. Qualitative analysis was conducted on the final section. The data provided evidence of statistically significant positive changes in caregiver perceptions of communication at the levels of Body Structure and Function, and Activities for Communication. Also, analysis of the Participation for Communication section revealed some expansion to the children's social activities. The potential impact of the home-based intervention would benefit from investigation on a larger scale. Limitations of the study are discussed.
    Augmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md.: 1985) 11/2014; 30(4):1-13. DOI:10.3109/07434618.2014.970294 · 1.28 Impact Factor