S D Fosså1, A A Dahl. 1. Department of Medical Oncology and Radiotherapy, The Norwegian Radium Hospital, University of Oslo, Montebello, 0310, Oslo, Norway. s.d.fossa@klinmed.uio.no
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the scorings of anxiety and depression assessed by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-A [Anxiety] and HADS-D [Depression]) with the scorings on the eight subscales of Short Form 36 (SF-36) and the Physical (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) assessed by the same patients. METHOD: In a cross-sectional study 736 long-term survivors after treatment for testicular cancer (TC) completed HADS and SF-36. Pearson's correlation coefficients were calculated on item and scale level to assess the associations between the HADS and the SF-36 scales and, in particular, between HADS and PCS and MCS, respectively. Independent predictors for PCS and MCS were identified by linear regression analysis. RESULTS: HADS-A and HADS-D were significantly associated with the SF-36 summary scales. HADS-A explained 5% of the variance of PCS and 49% of the variance of MCS. The comparable figures for HADS-D were 10% and 45%, respectively. In the multivariate analysis the HADS-D scoring independently predicted the level of PCS together with the patients' educational level, long-lasting working disability and age (variance: 30%). Both HADS-D and HADS-A remained independent parameters for MCS (variance: 58%) together with the patient's civil status. HADS-D item D4 ("slowed down") was similarly associated with both PCS and MCS. CONCLUSION: In univariate analyses HADS-D and HADS-A were statistically associated with PCS and MCS. The highest r values were observed for the associations between HADS and MCS, in particular between HADS-A and MCS. In the multivariate analyses HADS-D, but not HADS-A, contributed to PCS, whereas both HADS-A and HADS-D were associated with MCS. This pattern of different predictions of the summary scales of SF-36 supports a clinical practice that anxiety and depression should be assessed separately. Additional use of a self-rating instrument for depression and anxiety, such as HADS, is recommended when SF-36 is used for quality of life (QL) assessment.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the scorings of anxiety and depression assessed by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-A [Anxiety] and HADS-D [Depression]) with the scorings on the eight subscales of Short Form 36 (SF-36) and the Physical (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) assessed by the same patients. METHOD: In a cross-sectional study 736 long-term survivors after treatment for testicular cancer (TC) completed HADS and SF-36. Pearson's correlation coefficients were calculated on item and scale level to assess the associations between the HADS and the SF-36 scales and, in particular, between HADS and PCS and MCS, respectively. Independent predictors for PCS and MCS were identified by linear regression analysis. RESULTS:HADS-A and HADS-D were significantly associated with the SF-36 summary scales. HADS-A explained 5% of the variance of PCS and 49% of the variance of MCS. The comparable figures for HADS-D were 10% and 45%, respectively. In the multivariate analysis the HADS-D scoring independently predicted the level of PCS together with the patients' educational level, long-lasting working disability and age (variance: 30%). Both HADS-D and HADS-A remained independent parameters for MCS (variance: 58%) together with the patient's civil status. HADS-D item D4 ("slowed down") was similarly associated with both PCS and MCS. CONCLUSION: In univariate analyses HADS-D and HADS-A were statistically associated with PCS and MCS. The highest r values were observed for the associations between HADS and MCS, in particular between HADS-A and MCS. In the multivariate analyses HADS-D, but not HADS-A, contributed to PCS, whereas both HADS-A and HADS-D were associated with MCS. This pattern of different predictions of the summary scales of SF-36 supports a clinical practice that anxiety and depression should be assessed separately. Additional use of a self-rating instrument for depression and anxiety, such as HADS, is recommended when SF-36 is used for quality of life (QL) assessment.
Authors: Allan Ben Smith; Phyllis Butow; Ian Olver; Tim Luckett; Peter Grimison; Guy C Toner; Martin R Stockler; Elizabeth Hovey; John Stubbs; Sandra Turner; George Hruby; Howard Gurney; Mahmood Alam; Keith Cox; Madeleine T King Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2015-07-16 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Sefik Tagay; Stephan Herpertz; Matthias Langkafel; Yesim Erim; Andreas Bockisch; Wolfgang Senf; Rainer Görges Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Uros Bumbasirevic; Nebojsa Bojanic; Tatjana Pekmezovic; Aleksandar Janjic; Aleksandar Janicic; Bogomir Milojevic; Cane Tulic Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2012-08-30 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Amy Østertun Geirdal; Lovise Maehle; Ketil Heimdal; Astrid Stormorken; Pål Møller; Alv A Dahl Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Shirin ArdeshirRouhaniFard; Paul C Dinh; Patrick O Monahan; Sophie D Fossa; Robert Huddart; Chunkit Fung; Yiqing Song; Darren R Feldman; Robert J Hamilton; David J Vaughn; Neil E Martin; Christian Kollmannsberger; Lawrence Einhorn; Kurt Kroenke; Lois B Travis Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2021-04-13 Impact factor: 4.254