The validity of the distress thermometer in prostate cancer populations
Article
Article Title | The validity of the distress thermometer in prostate cancer populations |
---|---|
ERA Journal ID | 6624 |
Article Category | Article |
Authors | Chambers, Suzanne K. (Author), Zajdlewicz, Leah (Author), Youlden, Danny R. (Author), Holland, Jimmie C. (Author) and Dunn, Jeff (Author) |
Journal Title | Psycho-Oncology: journal of the psychological, social and behavioral dimensions of cancer |
Journal Citation | 23 (2), pp. 195-203 |
Number of Pages | 9 |
Year | 2014 |
Publisher | John Wiley & Sons |
Place of Publication | United Kingdom |
ISSN | 1057-9249 |
1099-1611 | |
Digital Object Identifier (DOI) | https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.3391 |
Web Address (URL) | http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pon.3391/abstract |
Abstract | Background The Distress Thermometer (DT) is widely recommended for screening for distress after cancer. However, the validity of the DT in men with prostate cancer and over differing time points from diagnosis has not been well examined. Method Receiver operating characteristics analyses were used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the DT compared with three commonly used standardised scales in two prospective and one cross-sectional survey of men with prostate cancer (n = 740, 189 and 463, respectively). Comparison scales included the Impact of Event Scale - Revised (IES-R, Study 1), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS, Study 2) and the Brief Symptom Inventory-18 (BSI-18, Study 3). Results Study 1: the DT showed good accuracy against the IES-R at all time points (area under curves (AUCs) ranging from 0.84 to 0.88) and sensitivity was high (>85%). Study 2: the DT performed well against both the anxiety and depression subscales for HADS at baseline (AUC = 0.84 and 0.82, respectively), but sensitivity decreased substantially after 12 months. Study 3: validity was high for the anxiety (AUC = 0.90, sensitivity = 90%) and depression (AUC = 0.85, sensitivity = 74%) subscales of the BSI-18 but was poorer for somatization (AUC = 0.67, sensitivity = 52%). A DT cut-off between ≥3 and ≥6 maximised sensitivity and specificity across analyses. Conclusions The DT is a valid tool to detect cancer-specific distress, anxiety and depression among prostate cancer patients, particularly close to diagnosis. A cut-off of ≥4 may be optimal soon after diagnosis, and for longer-term assessments, ≥3 was supported. |
Keywords | distress screening; distress thermometer; prostate cancer; psychosocial care; Cancer; Urology and Nephrology; Psychiatry; |
ANZSRC Field of Research 2020 | 321199. Oncology and carcinogenesis not elsewhere classified |
Public Notes | Files associated with this item cannot be displayed due to copyright restrictions. |
Byline Affiliations | Griffith University |
Cancer Council Australia, Australia | |
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States | |
Institution of Origin | University of Southern Queensland |
https://research.usq.edu.au/item/q42vz/the-validity-of-the-distress-thermometer-in-prostate-cancer-populations
1217
total views8
total downloads3
views this month0
downloads this month