Performance of Distress Thermometer: A Study among Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: The Distress Thermometer accompanied with Problems List is a commonly used screening tool for psychosocial distress. However, it's cut-off score, performance and risk factors for psychosocial distress varies among studies. This is the first study conducted in Nepal to investigate the Distress Thermometer's screening properties, its optimal cut-off score and evaluating the prevalence of psychosocial distress and its risk factors. METHODS: This cross-sectional study enrolled 162 heterogeneous cancer patients. The English form of the Distress Thermometer was translated to Nepali using a forward and backward translation method. Questionnaires including socio-demographic, clinical characteristics, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Distress Thermometer accompanied with Problems List were filled. Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis of distress thermometer scores was evaluated against Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Total (≥15). An Area Under the Curve, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were calculated at each Distress Thermometer cut-off score. RESULTS: Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis showed an excellent discriminating performance (Area Under the Curve =87.4%). A cut-off score of 4 on Distress Thermometer was established and it yielded sensitivity (88.9%), specificity (71.1%), positive predictive value (75.4%) and negative predictive value (86.5%) respectively. Furthermore, 55.6% of participants were distressed and emotional problems (odd ratio = 28.00), practical problems (odd ratio = 12.152) and physical problems (odd ratio = 2.397) were found to be significant risk factors for PD. CONCLUSIONS: PD is a global burden in cancer patients. The DT with a cut-off score of 4 accompanied with PL is valid instrument for screening PD in Nepali cancer patients. PL identified the problems that causes of PD.

Distress Thermometer Score Is Useful For Predicting Suicidal Ideation in Patients With Cancer.

PURPOSE: Suicidal ideation (SI) and depressive symptoms are common in patients with cancer. A Distress Thermometer (DT) is an effective tool to screen depression and anxiety in such cohorts. We investigated the value of the DT for predicting SI and the prevalence and associated risk factors of SI in the study population. METHODS: This cross-sectional study enrolled a total of 162 heterogeneous patients with cancer. Information regarding sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, DT score, and the past month SI were collected. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to find accuracy and the optimal cutoff score for predicting risk of SI. The significance of difference between DT scores was obtained using the median independence test. Likelihood of risk was analyzed through odds ratio. RESULTS: DT possesses good overall accuracy (area under the ROC curve = 0.797) for predicting SI in patients with cancer. The DT had a sensitivity of 0.929 and a specificity of 0.522 with a cutoff score of ≥4. The patients with SI had significantly higher DT scores than the patients without SI (7 [5,8] v 3 [1,6]; P < .001). The 1-month prevalence of SI was 17.3%. Depression, anxiety, and psychological distress were the predictive factors of SI. CONCLUSION: SI is a global issue in patients with cancer. The DT scores may be a rapid predicting tool for identifying SI in patients with cancer. Higher DT scores and patients with psychosocial problems need to be routinely screened for SI, which may help to prevent suicidal risk.

Corrigendum to "Performance of Distress Thermometer and Associated Factors of Psychological Distress among Chinese Cancer Patients".

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1155/2020/3293589.].

Performance of Distress Thermometer and Associated Factors of Psychological Distress among Chinese Cancer Patients.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine the performance of the distress thermometer (DT) and identify the prevalence and risk factors associated with psychological distress (PD) in heterogeneous cancer patients. METHODS: This cross-sectional study enrolled 1496 heterogeneous cancer patients from the inpatient and outpatient departments. Receiver operating characteristic analysis (ROC) of DT was evaluated against the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Total (HADS-T ≥15). An area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and clinical utility index were calculated. Multiple binary logistic regression was used to identify the factors associated with PD. RESULTS: Referring to ROC analysis, DT showed good discriminating accuracy (AUC = 0.88). A cutoff score of 4 was established, and it yielded sensitivity (0.81), specificity (0.88), PPV (0.87), NPV (0.82), and clinical utility indexes (screening utility = 0.71 and case-finding utility = 0.73). 46.5% of our participants was distressed. Lower education levels (odd ratio (OR) = 1.39), advanced stage (OR = 1.85), active disease status (OR = 1.82), lack of exercise (OR = 3.03), diagnosis known (OR = 0.64), emotional problems (OR = 3.54), and physical problems (OR = 8.62) were the predictive factors for PD. CONCLUSION: DT with a cutoff score (≥4) is a comprehensive, appropriate, and practical initial screener for PD in cancer patients. Predicting factors should be considered together for effective management of PD in such population.