MedElevator
Войти в исследования Psycho-oncology · 2026
Association of Distress Severity and Problem Burden in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gao May Z, Hunter Alexandra E, White Melissa C, Corbett Cheyenne, Kahmke Russel R, Jiang Rong, Osazuwa-Peters Nosayaba
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors face heightened psychological distress, but it is unclear how distress severity relates to concerns reported on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Distress Thermometer (DT) problem list. We examined associations between distress levels and problem list endorsement among HNC patients.
METHODS: We analyzed data from 507 patients with HNC, and grouped DT scores as: no distress (score = 0, n = 134 (26.4%)), mild distress (score = one to three, n = 141 (27.8%)), and clinically meaningful distress (score = 4-10, n = 232 (45.8%)). Frequencies of problem list items and domains were calculated. Spearman's correlation assessed the relationship between distress and total problem burden, and logistic regression evaluated associations between distress severity and problem endorsement, adjusting for demographics and behaviors.
RESULTS: Distress was weakly but significantly correlated with total problem burden (r = 0.11, p = 0.016). The most common concerns were pain, eating changes, worry/anxiety, fatigue, nervousness, treatment decisions, fear, sleep, depression, and swelling. Patients with clinically meaningful distress were more likely to endorse worry/anxiety (aOR = 5.05, 95% CI 1.70-15.04) and treatment decisions (aOR = 3.49, 95% CI 1.16-10.53). Distress levels were not associated with pain (p = 0.26).
CONCLUSIONS: Standard NCCN distress thresholds may miss a substantial proportion of HNC patients with meaningful psychosocial and physical concerns. Pain remains highly prevalent regardless of distress level, highlighting a role for universal pain assessment.
METHODS: We analyzed data from 507 patients with HNC, and grouped DT scores as: no distress (score = 0, n = 134 (26.4%)), mild distress (score = one to three, n = 141 (27.8%)), and clinically meaningful distress (score = 4-10, n = 232 (45.8%)). Frequencies of problem list items and domains were calculated. Spearman's correlation assessed the relationship between distress and total problem burden, and logistic regression evaluated associations between distress severity and problem endorsement, adjusting for demographics and behaviors.
RESULTS: Distress was weakly but significantly correlated with total problem burden (r = 0.11, p = 0.016). The most common concerns were pain, eating changes, worry/anxiety, fatigue, nervousness, treatment decisions, fear, sleep, depression, and swelling. Patients with clinically meaningful distress were more likely to endorse worry/anxiety (aOR = 5.05, 95% CI 1.70-15.04) and treatment decisions (aOR = 3.49, 95% CI 1.16-10.53). Distress levels were not associated with pain (p = 0.26).
CONCLUSIONS: Standard NCCN distress thresholds may miss a substantial proportion of HNC patients with meaningful psychosocial and physical concerns. Pain remains highly prevalent regardless of distress level, highlighting a role for universal pain assessment.