Psycho-oncology · 2018
A cross-sectional study of agreement between the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and patient- and radiation oncologist-reported single-item assessment of depression and anxiety.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Mackenzie Lisa, Carey Mariko, Suzuki Eiji, Yoshimura Michio, Toi Masakazu, D'Este Catherine, Sanson-Fisher Rob
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To describe among radiation oncology patients: (1) the proportion likely to be experiencing symptoms of depression and anxiety as identified by (a) the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS; standardised tool), (b) patient-reported single items (ultrashort tool), and (c) radiation oncologist-reported single items (clinician judgement); (2) preferences for being offered psychological support; and (3) agreement between single-item measures and the HADS.
METHODS: Adult cancer patients (n = 152; consent rate 58%) receiving radiotherapy completed a touchscreen tablet survey assessing symptoms of anxiety and depression (HADS and a single-item tool) and support preferences. Each participant's treating radiation oncologist completed a survey assessing his or her perception of whether the patient was anxious or depressed.
RESULTS: Prevalence estimates for likely depression (6.9-18%) and anxiety (17-33%) overlapped across the 3 measures. Overall, only 9.9% of patients (95% CI, 5.6%-16%) wanted to be offered psychological support. For depression, agreement between the HADS and ultrashort tool was fair (κ = 0.37, P < 0.0001); agreement between the HADS and clinician judgement was slight (κ = 0.14, P < 0.05). For anxiety, agreement between the HADS and clinician judgement was not significantly greater than chance alone (κ = 0.04, P = 0.33), and agreement between the HADS and ultrashort tool was moderate (κ = 0.49, P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the important role that oncology consultations play in interpreting assessment tool results and responding to individual patient's history and preferences for psychological support.
METHODS: Adult cancer patients (n = 152; consent rate 58%) receiving radiotherapy completed a touchscreen tablet survey assessing symptoms of anxiety and depression (HADS and a single-item tool) and support preferences. Each participant's treating radiation oncologist completed a survey assessing his or her perception of whether the patient was anxious or depressed.
RESULTS: Prevalence estimates for likely depression (6.9-18%) and anxiety (17-33%) overlapped across the 3 measures. Overall, only 9.9% of patients (95% CI, 5.6%-16%) wanted to be offered psychological support. For depression, agreement between the HADS and ultrashort tool was fair (κ = 0.37, P < 0.0001); agreement between the HADS and clinician judgement was slight (κ = 0.14, P < 0.05). For anxiety, agreement between the HADS and clinician judgement was not significantly greater than chance alone (κ = 0.04, P = 0.33), and agreement between the HADS and ultrashort tool was moderate (κ = 0.49, P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the important role that oncology consultations play in interpreting assessment tool results and responding to individual patient's history and preferences for psychological support.