The efficiency of distress thermometer in the determination of supporting needs for cancer inpatients

Abstract

Psychological distress scale is highly recommended for cancer patients’ care. Several psychological scales have been implemented in cancer outpatient clinics. However, the use of the psychological distress scale, particularly distress thermometer (DT), in the inpatient has not been reported. In this study, we report the efficacy of DT in the determination of cancer inpatients’ supporting needs. A total of 170 inpatients diagnosed with cancer have been enrolled in this study. Only 132 patients matched the inclusion criteria, while other cases were excluded because of other diseases associated with cancer. The standardized problem list (PL) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) were implemented in comparison with DT. Then, the cut-off score of DT was performed to identify clinically significant differences. The analysis of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve revealed that a DT cut-off score of 4 displayed 0.76 under the ROC curve. Sensitivity showed 0.86 sensitivity for cut-off score 4 and a specificity of 0.56 relative to the HADS cut-off score (≥15). DT scores were found independent of medical variables such as cancer type and stage, recurrence, or metastasis. Clinical ECOG-SP showed a significant association with the DT cut-off score (P ≤ 0.05). Regarding PL, patients with scores above DT cut-off were suffering 21 of 40 problems in all categories. Furthermore, patients that scored above the DT cut-off significantly showed an association with high support needs. DT scale showed significant performance in the evaluation of psychological distress among cancer inpatients through the efficient determination of their support needs.

Availability and stability of palliative care for family members of terminally ill patients in an integrated model of health and social care

“…In our study, we assessed several key components related to the well-being of family members of terminally ill patients receiving palliative care, including quality of life, family burden, and psychosocial status applied corresponding scales [36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43]. These components serve as crucial indicators of the effectiveness of palliative care interventions and have important implications for both practice and research in the field of palliative care.…”

“…HAMA score was divided into no anxiety (≤ 7), possible anxiety (7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14), definitely anxiety (14-21), obvious anxiety (21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29), and severe anxiety levels (≥ 29) [40,41]. Additionally, in DT, a cut-off value of ≥ 5 is considered clinically relevant distress with a need of professional psychological support [42,43].…”

Cancer care during the Covid-19 pandemic from the perspective of patients and their relatives: A qualitative study

“…The NCCN-DT is a Likert scale from 0 (no distress) to 10 (severe distress), with an established cut-off score of 4 for further screening. Higher scores indicate a higher level of distress [ 8 , 19 ].…”

“…Patients with cancer and their family caregivers already have a higher risk of depression and anxiety, due to the disease and therapy [ 8 ]. Psychological distress can have a negative impact on the quality of life, the response to treatment, performance status, medical care satisfaction, and survival [ 9 ].…”

Evaluation of Emotional Distress in a Cohort of Newly Diagnosed Cancer Patients: A Study of 67 Individuas

“…[4]. Abdullah Al-Shaaobia and colleagues (2021) screened in 130 cancer patients, reporting rates of no distress at 15.91%, mild distress at 56.07%, and moderate to severe distress at 28.02% [5]. Nguyen Tien Quang and colleagues found that the rate of cancer patients without distress was 2.3%; mild distress is 42.7%; moderate and severe distress is 55% [6].…”