Mirjam Renovanz1,2, Sari Soebianto3, Helena Tsakmaklis3, Naureen Keric3, Minou Nadji-Ohl4, Manfred Beutel5, Florian Ringel3, Daniel Wollschläger6, Anne-Katrin Hickmann4,7. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, University Medical Center, Johannes-Gutenberg-University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany. mirjam.renovanz@med.uni-tuebingen.de. 2. Interdisciplinary Division of Neurooncology, Departments of Neurology & Neurosurgery, University Medical Center Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany. mirjam.renovanz@med.uni-tuebingen.de. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, University Medical Center, Johannes-Gutenberg-University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany. 4. Department of Neurosurgery, Klinikum Stuttgart, Katharinenhospital, Stuttgart, Germany. 5. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center, Johannes-Gutenberg-University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany. 6. Institute of Medical Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University Medical Center, Johannes-Gutenberg-University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany. 7. Department of Neurosurgery, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Depressive symptoms of patients with intracranial tumors need to be assessed adequately. The Patient Health Questionnaire for Depression and Anxiety (PHQ-4) is an ultra-short screening tool consisting of four items, a cutoff of six indicates depressive symptoms. The aim was to assess patients' psychological burden by the PHQ-4 compared with the results of well-established screening instruments. METHODS: Patients were screened three times after primary diagnosis postoperatively (t1), after 3 (t2) and 6 (t3) months using the PHQ-4, the Hornheide Screening Instrument (HSI), the NCCN Distress Thermometer (DT), and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core Questionnaire with its brain module (EORTC QLQ-C30 + BN20). Demographic, tumor-related data, and Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) were analyzed. A cutoff value for PHQ-4 indicating a need for support or increased distress was determined by applying receiver operating characteristic (ROC). RESULTS: The proportion of patients reaching a total score ≥ 6 was n = 32 out of 139 (23%) at t1; at t2, n = 12 out of 117 (10%) scored ≥ 6. At t3, n = 8 out of 96 (8%) scored ≥ 6. At t1, PHQ-4 scores did not differ significantly between gender, age groups, and tumor laterality. A cutoff value of 2.5 was identified to moderately discriminate between patients in or not in distress (sensitivity 76.8%) and between patients wishing further, specific support or not (sensitivity 82.5%). CONCLUSION: The PHQ4 can be applied in this patient cohort to detect those with relevant psychological comorbidities. The cutoff value should be re-evaluated in a larger cohort as we observed that a cutoff of 6, as recommended previously, may be too high in order to detect affected patients adequately.
PURPOSE:Depressive symptoms of patients with intracranial tumors need to be assessed adequately. The Patient Health Questionnaire for Depression and Anxiety (PHQ-4) is an ultra-short screening tool consisting of four items, a cutoff of six indicates depressive symptoms. The aim was to assess patients' psychological burden by the PHQ-4 compared with the results of well-established screening instruments. METHODS:Patients were screened three times after primary diagnosis postoperatively (t1), after 3 (t2) and 6 (t3) months using the PHQ-4, the Hornheide Screening Instrument (HSI), the NCCN Distress Thermometer (DT), and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core Questionnaire with its brain module (EORTC QLQ-C30 + BN20). Demographic, tumor-related data, and Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) were analyzed. A cutoff value for PHQ-4 indicating a need for support or increased distress was determined by applying receiver operating characteristic (ROC). RESULTS: The proportion of patients reaching a total score ≥ 6 was n = 32 out of 139 (23%) at t1; at t2, n = 12 out of 117 (10%) scored ≥ 6. At t3, n = 8 out of 96 (8%) scored ≥ 6. At t1, PHQ-4 scores did not differ significantly between gender, age groups, and tumor laterality. A cutoff value of 2.5 was identified to moderately discriminate between patients in or not in distress (sensitivity 76.8%) and between patients wishing further, specific support or not (sensitivity 82.5%). CONCLUSION: The PHQ4 can be applied in this patient cohort to detect those with relevant psychological comorbidities. The cutoff value should be re-evaluated in a larger cohort as we observed that a cutoff of 6, as recommended previously, may be too high in order to detect affected patients adequately.
Authors: Alyssa Newberry; Paula Sherwood; Allison Hricik; Sarah Bradley; Jean Kuo; Elizabeth Crago; Leslie A Hoffman; Barbara A Given Journal: J Neurosci Nurs Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 1.230
Authors: M Renovanz; A-K Hickmann; J Coburger; K Kohlmann; M Janko; A-K Reuter; N Keric; M Nadji-Ohl; J König; S Singer; A Giese; M Hechtner Journal: Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) Date: 2016-10-24 Impact factor: 2.520
Authors: Joseph Low; Sue Gessler; Rachael Williams; Emma Daniells; Veronica Brough; Adrian Tookman; Louise Jones Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2009-04-02 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Samantha Spiers; Evrim Oral; Elizabeth T H Fontham; Edward S Peters; James L Mohler; Jeannette T Bensen; Christine S Brennan Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2018-06-20 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Petra Huehnchen; Nikola Bangemann; Sandra Lischewski; Stefanie Märschenz; Friedemann Paul; Tanja Schmitz-Hübsch; Jens-Uwe Blohmer; Cornelia Eberhardt; Geraldine Rauch; Agnes Flöel; Sophie Adam; Philipp Schwenkenbecher; Ivo Meinhold-Heerlein; Oliver Hoffmann; Tjalf Ziemssen; Matthias Endres; Wolfgang Boehmerle Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2022-08-11