Dutch normative data and psychometric properties for the Distress Thermometer for Parents

Abstract

PurposeThe aim of this study was to provide Dutch normative data for the Distress Thermometer for Parents (DT-P) and to assess internal consistency and known-groups validity.MethodsA sample of 1421 parents (60.7 % mothers), representative of the Dutch population, completed online sociodemographic questionnaire and the DT-P, which includes a thermometer (0 (no distress) to 10 (extreme distress), ≥4 clinically elevated distress) and everyday problems across six problem domains (practical, social, emotional, physical, cognitive, and parenting). Internal consistency was calculated using Cronbach’s alphas. Known-groups validity was assessed by comparing parents of a child with a chronic condition (N = 287, 20.2 %) with parents of healthy children, using Mann–Whitney U tests and Chi-square tests.ResultsThe DT-P showed acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach’s alphas = .52–.89). Parents of a child with a chronic condition more often reported clinically elevated distress than parents of healthy children (53.0 versus 38.2 %, p < .001). Also, on all domains they reported more problems (p = .000–.022). Normative scores for mothers and fathers separately were provided.ConclusionThe DT-P distinguishes well between parents of a child with and without a chronic condition. With the current norms available, distress can be evaluated in parents of a child with a chronic condition compared to parents of healthy children in pediatric clinical practice.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11136-016-1405-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Parental distress 6 months after a pediatric cancer diagnosis in relation to family psychosocial risk at diagnosis

“…24 Because Levene's test for equality of variances was significant, differences in DT-P scores between the parents (mothers and fathers separately) of children with cancer and the parents of healthy children were determined with Mann-Whitney U tests (for the mean DT-P thermometer score and DT-P problem domain scores) and logistic regression analyses (for clinically elevated distress and additional DT-P questions). Chi-square tests (patient sex and diagnosis type) and an independent sample t test (patient age) were performed to compare participants with nonparticipants.…”

“…Participants were recruited between June 2012 and January 2015. 24 The TNS NIPObase is a database with a panel of 200,000 respondents who have indicated that they are willing to participate in TNS NIPO research on a regular basis. The inclusion criteria were as follows: 1) a confirmed first diagnosis of cancer in a child aged 0 to 18 years, 2) the receipt of treatment with a curative intent, and 3) a good enough understanding of Dutch to be able to complete a family psychosocial screening questionnaire.…”

“…23,24 The Dutch DT-P 23 is an adaptation of the Dutch version of the Distress Thermometer, a screening tool in standard adult oncology practice. 23,24 The Dutch DT-P 23 is an adaptation of the Dutch version of the Distress Thermometer, a screening tool in standard adult oncology practice.…”

“…Even though the DT-P has been shown to have good psychometric properties in the general population and in a sample of parents of children with a chronic illness, 23,24 it is still a relatively new instrument to use for parents of children with cancer. Even though the DT-P has been shown to have good psychometric properties in the general population and in a sample of parents of children with a chronic illness, 23,24 it is still a relatively new instrument to use for parents of children with cancer.…”

“…Concerning the measurement of parental distress, the Distress Thermometer for Parents (DT-P) is a noninvasive screening tool for detecting parental distress. Even though the DT-P has been shown to have good psychometric properties in the general population and in a sample of parents of children with a chronic illness, 23,24 it is still a relatively new instrument to use for parents of children with cancer. It is, therefore, interesting to see whether it discriminates well between parents of healthy children and parents of children with cancer.…”