Helena Sousa1, Jaime Oliveira2, Daniela Figueiredo1, Oscar Ribeiro2. 1. Center for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS.UA), School of Health Sciences, University of Aveiro (Campus Universitário de Santiago), Aveiro, Portugal. 2. Department of Education and Psychology, Center for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS.UA), University of Aveiro (Campus Universitário de Santiago), Aveiro, Portugal.
Abstract
AIMS: To assess the clinical utility of the Distress Thermometer (DT) in non-cancer populations. METHODS: The search was performed between the 6th and the 18th of April 2020, on the following databases: Web of Science (all databases included), Scopus and Science Direct. One last update was performed on 5 June 2020. The findings were reported using the PRISMA-ScR. RESULTS: Fifty-three studies were included. Overall results indicated that this tool has been used in several contexts and populations (clinical and non-clinical). The DT is highly accessible, suitable and relevant for health professionals and/or researchers who aim to use it as a distress screening tool, particularly in patients with chronic physical conditions. Assumptions about its practicality and acceptability in non-oncology care should be made with caution since few studies have explored the psychometric qualities of this instrument, the completers' perceptions about completing the DT and the perceptions of health professionals who administer the tool. CONCLUSIONS: This lack of information undermines conclusions about the overall clinical utility of the DT as a screening tool for distress in individuals who do not have cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Future research should aim to fill this gap and investigate the psychometric qualities of the DT through validation studies and, thus, increase the rigour of its application and clinical utility in non-oncological contexts.
AIMS: To assess the clinical utility of the Distress Thermometer (DT) in non-cancer populations. METHODS: The search was performed between the 6th and the 18th of April 2020, on the following databases: Web of Science (all databases included), Scopus and Science Direct. One last update was performed on 5 June 2020. The findings were reported using the PRISMA-ScR. RESULTS: Fifty-three studies were included. Overall results indicated that this tool has been used in several contexts and populations (clinical and non-clinical). The DT is highly accessible, suitable and relevant for health professionals and/or researchers who aim to use it as a distress screening tool, particularly in patients with chronic physical conditions. Assumptions about its practicality and acceptability in non-oncology care should be made with caution since few studies have explored the psychometric qualities of this instrument, the completers' perceptions about completing the DT and the perceptions of health professionals who administer the tool. CONCLUSIONS: This lack of information undermines conclusions about the overall clinical utility of the DT as a screening tool for distress in individuals who do not have cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Future research should aim to fill this gap and investigate the psychometric qualities of the DT through validation studies and, thus, increase the rigour of its application and clinical utility in non-oncological contexts.
Authors: Louise Rose; Amelia Cook; Juliana Onwumere; Ella Terblanche; Natalie Pattison; Victoria Metaxa; Joel Meyer Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2022-08-01 Impact factor: 41.787