Informal caregivers of advanced-stage cancer patients: Every second is at risk for psychiatric morbidity.

PURPOSE: Informal caregivers of advanced cancer patients are known to suffer from high distress due to their caregiving responsibilities. Nevertheless, a comprehensive evaluation of psychiatric morbidity is often missing in clinical practice due to time resources, and mental health problems may be unnoticed in this population. A feasible approach is needed to identify caregivers at risk for psychiatric disorders to offer targeted interventions and enhance their well-being. METHODS: This cross-sectional, multi-institutional study screened 345 caregivers of advanced cancer patients for psychiatric disorders (i.e., depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder, and alcohol abuse/dependence) and assessed factors potentially associated with mental health diagnoses (including socio-demographic factors, burden, hope, caring-related quality of life, and coping preferences). RESULTS: Overall, almost 52 % of participants had one or more suspected psychiatric disorders, with anxiety being the most prevalent. Perceived hope, higher burden, and more emotion-oriented coping were associated with psychiatric morbidity in this sample. Spouses and parents showed significantly more symptoms of psychiatric disorders than other relatives. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the high risk of informal caregivers of advanced cancer patients to develop psychiatric disorders and suggests a practically feasible approach to identify at risk caregivers to offer support.

The PERS(2) ON score for systemic assessment of symptomatology in palliative care: a pilot study.

The comprehensive assessment of symptoms is the basis for effective, individualised palliative treatment. Established scoring systems provide in-depth information but are often lengthy and hence unsuitable. We introduce the PERS(2) ON score as a short and practically feasible score to evaluate symptom burden. Fifty patients admitted to a Palliative Care Unit rated seven items, i.e. pain, eating (loss of appetite/weight loss), rehabilitation (physical impairment), social situation (possibility for home care), suffering (anxiety/burden of disease/depression), O2 (dyspnoea) and nausea/emesis, on a scale ranging from 0 (absence) to 10 (worst imaginable), resulting in a score ranging from 0 to 70. Assessments were performed at admission, 7 days after admission and at the day of discharge. Symptom intensity scores were calculated, and change over time was evaluated. A significant improvement was observed from the PERS²ON score between admission and 7 days (P < 0.001; paired t-test). Significant improvement from baseline evaluation to evaluation on the day of discharge was observed (P = 0.001; paired t-test). This study provides initial evidence that the PERS²ON score is both feasible and sensitive to changes of the most prominent symptoms in palliative care. It may be useful in clinical practice to direct palliative treatment strategies and provide targeted symptom management.