Literature DB >> 23905694

What to do with screening for distress scores? Integrating descriptive data into clinical practice.

Marie-Claude Blais1, Alexandre St-Hilaire2, Lise Fillion3, Marie De Serres4, Annie Tremblay4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Implementation of routine Screening for Distress constitutes a major change in cancer care, with the aim of achieving person-centered care.
METHOD: Using a cross-sectional descriptive design within a University Tertiary Care Hospital setting, 911 patients from all cancer sites were screened at the time of their first meeting with a nurse navigator who administered a paper questionnaire that included: the Distress Thermometer (DT), the Canadian Problem Checklist (CPC), and the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS).
RESULTS: Results showed a mean score of 3.9 on the DT. Fears/worries, coping with the disease, and sleep were the most common problems reported on the CPC. Tiredness was the most prevalent symptom on the ESAS. A final regression model that included anxiety, the total number of problems on the CPC, well-being, and tiredness accounted for almost 50% of the variance of distress. A cutoff score of 5 on the DT together with a cutoff of 5 on the ESAS items represents the best combination of specificity and sensitivity to orient patients on the basis of their reported distress. SIGNIFICANCE OF
RESULTS: These descriptive data will provide valuable feedback to answer practical questions for the purpose of effectively implementing and managing routine screening in cancer care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23905694     DOI: 10.1017/S1478951513000059

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Palliat Support Care        ISSN: 1478-9515


  10 in total

1.  Screening for clinical insomnia in cancer patients with the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-Revised: a specific sleep item is needed.

Authors:  Josée Savard; Hans Ivers
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2019-02-04       Impact factor: 3.603

2.  Screening for symptom burden and supportive needs of patients with glioblastoma and brain metastases and their caregivers in relation to their use of specialized palliative care.

Authors:  Bettina Seekatz; Matthias Lukasczik; Mario Löhr; Katja Ehrmann; Michael Schuler; Almuth F Keßler; Silke Neuderth; Ralf-Ingo Ernestus; Birgitt van Oorschot
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2017-03-29       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  Psychosocial risk, symptom burden, and concerns in families affected by childhood cancer.

Authors:  K Brooke Russell; Michaela Patton; Courtney Tromburg; Hailey Zwicker; Gregory M T Guilcher; Barry D Bultz; Fiona Schulte
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2021-10-31       Impact factor: 3.603

4.  "I Want to Help Others Like Me": A Pilot Qualitative Study on Patients' Participation in a Screening for Distress Program.

Authors:  Jacynthe Rivest; Véronique Desbeaumes Jodoin; Joé T Martineau; Nathalie Folch; Danielle Charpentier
Journal:  J Patient Exp       Date:  2022-06-12

5.  Patient-reported outcomes in Alberta: rationale, scope, and design of a database initiative.

Authors:  C A Cuthbert; L Watson; Y Xu; D J Boyne; B R Hemmelgarn; W Y Cheung
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 3.677

6.  Capacity of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System and the Canadian Problem Checklist to screen clinical insomnia in cancer patients.

Authors:  Josée Savard; Hans Ivers; Marie-Hélène Savard
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2016-05-18       Impact factor: 3.603

7.  Patient-reported symptoms during radiotherapy : Clinically relevant symptom burden in patients treated with palliative and curative intent.

Authors:  Philipp Körner; Katja Ehrmann; Johann Hartmannsgruber; Michaela Metz; Sabrina Steigerwald; Michael Flentje; Birgitt van Oorschot
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 3.621

8.  Meeting psychosocial needs to improve health: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Austyn Snowden; Jenny Young; Jan Savinc
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2020-06-05       Impact factor: 4.430

9.  Stability and Repeatability of the Distress Thermometer (DT) and the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-Revised (ESAS-r) with Parents of Childhood Cancer Survivors.

Authors:  Tatsiana Leclair; Anne-Sophie Carret; Yvan Samson; Serge Sultan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Feasibility of implementing the 'Screening for Distress and Referral Need' process in 23 Dutch hospitals.

Authors:  F M van Nuenen; S M Donofrio; M A Tuinman; H B M van de Wiel; J E H M Hoekstra-Weebers
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2016-08-26       Impact factor: 3.603

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.