The psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and its utility as a screening instrument for anxiety and depression in a non-psychiatric setting were evaluated. The questionnaire was administered twice to 197 breast cancer patients randomised in a phase III adjuvant clinical trial: before the start of chemotherapy and at the first follow-up visit. The presence of psychiatric disorders was evaluated at the follow-up visit using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R in 132 patients. Factor analyses identified two strictly correlated factors. Crohnbach's alpha for the anxiety and depression scales ranged between 0.80 and 0.85. At follow-up, 50 patients (38%) were assigned a current DSM-III-R diagnosis, in most cases adjustment disorders (24%) or major depressive disorder (10%). Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis was used to test the discriminant validity for both anxiety and depressive disorders. The comparison of the areas under the curve (AUC) between the two scales did not show any difference in identifying either anxiety (P = 0.855) or depressive disorders (P = 0.357). The 14-item total scale showed a high internal consistency (alpha = 0.89 and 0.88) and a high discriminating power for all the psychiatric disorders (AUC = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.83-0.94). The cut-off point that maximised sensitivity (84%) and specificity (79%) was 10. These results suggest that the total score is a valid measure of emotional distress, so that the Italian version of HADS can be used as a screening questionnaire for psychiatric disorders. The use of the two subscales as a 'case identifier' or as an outcome measure should be considered with caution.
This study identified the needs of terminal cancer patients, investigated the factors associated with unmet needs, and assessed psychological and symptom distress associated with unsolved needs. Ninety-four patients were randomly selected from 324 patients admitted for palliative care in 13 Italian centers. Two self-administered questionnaires (the Symptom Distress Scale and the Psychological Distress Inventory) were administered to all the patients. Patients needs were identified using a semi-structured interview, aimed at exploring five areas: physiological needs, safety needs, love and belonging needs, self-esteem needs, self-fulfillment needs. A content analysis of the answers defined 11 needs, and identified patients with unmet needs. The most frequent unmet needs were symptom control (62.8%), occupational functioning (62.1%), and emotional support (51.7%). The less frequently reported needs were those related to personal care (14.6%), financial support (14.1%), and emotional closeness (13.8%). Low functional state was significantly associated with a high proportion of patients with unmet needs of personal care, information, communication, occupational functioning, and emotional closeness. Patients with unmet needs showed significantly higher psychological and symptom distress for most needs. This study provides some suggestions about the concerns that should be carefully considered during the late stage of cancer.
Background: screening for psychological distress in cancer patients is important, considering the high prevalence of psychiatric disorders responsive to treatment. The aim of this study is to test the psychometric properties of the Psychological Distress Inventory (PDI), a 13-item self-administered questionnaire developed to measure psychological distress in cancer patients. Patients and Methods: The PDI was tested in three samples of 434 cancer patients. In the first sample (n = 102) it was administered with the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and with the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ). Its validity as a screening method for psychiatric disorders was evaluated through a clinical interview in the second sample (n = 107). The third sample (n = 225) provided information on the ability of the PDI to discriminate among patients in different clinical phases of disease and allowed an estimate of the prevalence of psychiatric disorders in these groups of patients. Results: A 0.88 a coefficient was obtained in the whole study sample. The correlations with the STAI scales were > 0.70. A positive correlation with neuroticism (r = 0.59) and a negative correlation with extroversion (r = ––0.34) was observed. In the second sample, 67 patients (62.6%) received a psychiatric diagnosis according to the ICD-X criteria. The mean PDI scores were significantly lower for the 40 patients with no psychiatric diagnosis (mean 24.5) as compared with the 49 patients with adjustment disorders (mean 36.4) and with the 12 patients with depressive disorders (mean 40.8). The area under curve, estimated through a Receiver-Operating Characteristics analysis, was 0.88. A cut-off of 29 was associated with a 75% sensitivity and a 85% specificity. In the third sample, the lowest PDI scores were in patients with no evidence of disease (mean 24.7, 95% CL 23.0–26.4) as compared to patients undergoing antineoplastic treatment (mean 30.9, 95% CL 28.9–32.9) and to patients under palliative therapy (mean 36.0, 95% CL 34.0–37.9). The estimated prevalence of patients with psychiatric disorders in these three groups were respectively 5.0, 56.6 and 98.8%. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the PDI is a reliable and valid tool for measuring psychological distress in cancer patients and to detect psychiatric disorders through a screening procedure.
These findings suggest that not necessarily the observed cultural changes towards a less paternalistic approach in medical care translate into an effective change in the quantity of information delivered to the patients.
Assisting a family member with cancer in his/her last three months of life is a very strong physical and mental stress for the caregiver. In some cases, this experience is nevertheless perceived as an evolution chance. Health-care providers should need to develop programs to ensure that family caregivers' needs for information and support are given great importance.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.