The validity of the Distress Thermometer in female partners of men with prostate cancer

Abstract

Female partners of prostate cancer (PCa) survivors experience heightened psychological distress that may be greater than that expressed by PCa patients. However, optimal approaches to detect distressed, or at risk of distress, partners are unclear. This study applied receiver operating characteristics analysis to evaluate diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of the Distress Thermometer (DT) compared to widely used measures of general (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) and cancer‐specific (Impact of Events Scale‐Revised) distress. Participants were partners of men with localised PCa (recruited around diagnosis) about to undergo or had received surgical treatment (N = 189), and partners of men diagnosed with PCa who were 2–4 years post‐treatment (N = 460). In both studies, diagnostic utility of the DT overall was not optimal. Although area under the curve scores were acceptable (ranges: 0.71–0.92 and 0.83–0.94 for general and cancer‐specific distress, respectively), sensitivity, specificity and optimal DT cut‐offs for partner distress varied for general (range: ≥2 to ≥5) and cancer‐specific (range: ≥3 to ≥5) distress both across time and between cohorts. Thus, it is difficult to draw firm conclusions about the diagnostic capabilities of the DT for partners or recommend its use in this population. More comprehensive screening measures may be needed to detect partners needing psychological intervention.

Designing Supportive e-Interventions for Partners of Men With Prostate Cancer Using Female Partners’ Experiences: Qualitative Exploration Study

“…2. Identify partner preferences around the potential role of smartphone app in supporting their needs. 3. Obtain feedback on an example smartphone app and the potential role of a generic platform that can incorporate…”

“…Globally, prostate cancer (PCa) is the most commonly occurring cancer in men [1], with over 16,000 men diagnosed in Australia in 2020, accounting for approximately 20% of all male cancer diagnoses [2]. PCa survivorship research has predominantly focused on the psychological and physical effect of PCa treatments on men [3]. The psychosocial impact on their partners is an emerging area of priority, with research suggesting they may experience greater levels of distress than the individual with PCa [4][5][6], which may be attributed to avoidant communication between patients and partners [7].…”

“…Partners also report their own needs often go unaddressed by health care professionals [ 8 ]. As evidence of acceptable and effective interventions to support the partners of men with PCa remains unclear [ 9 ], further understanding of partner- or caregiver-specific issues is increasingly recognized as important to inform evidence-based supportive interventions [ 3 , 9 ]. A clearer understanding is needed to determine whether e-interventions can be adapted to meet partners’ specific needs.…”

Experiences of female partners of prostate cancer survivors: A systematic review and thematic synthesis

“…To date, research on PCa survivorship has largely focused on the psychological and physical effects of PCa treatments on men (Hyde et al., 2019). The psychosocial impact on female partners is less well described, however, research suggests that they may experience more distress than survivors (Chambers et al., 2013; Couper et al., 2006).…”

“…While good quality evidence exists for effective psychosocial and psychosexual interventions for men, evidence of acceptable and effective interventions for female partners remains unclear (Chambers et al., 2017), and the optimal method of screening for partner distress has not been identified (Hyde et al., 2019). There is increasing recognition of the need for further research to understand partner or caregiver‐specific issues to inform evidence‐based approaches to support their health and well‐being (Chambers et al., 2017; Couper et al., 2006; Gilleece et al., 2019; Hyde et al., 2019). In particular, research addressing the experiences of female partners of PCa survivors (Arrington, 2005) increasingly recognises the potential influence of gender roles, relations, and identities (Lim et al., 2015; Ussher & Sandoval, 2008).…”