Sun-Young Park1,2, Yoonjoo Kim3, Hyunju Hong4. 1. Graduate School, Yonsei University, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Korea. 2. Division of New Health Technology Assessment, National Evidence-Based Healthcare Collaborating Agency, 400 Neungdong-ro, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul, 04554, Korea. 3. Department of Nursing, College of Healthcare Sciences, Far East University, Eumseong-gun, Chungcheongbuk-do, Seoul, South Korea, 27601. 4. National Cancer Center, 323 Ilsan-ro, Goyang-si, Gyeonggi-do, 10408, Korea. 10598@ncc.re.kr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Treatment for hematological malignancies (HMs) and functional decline associated with age can cause distress in elderly patients with HMs. However, information about the nature and effects of distress in this population is scarce. Therefore, this study examined the level of distress, its source, and the practical/familial/physical/emotional problems among elderly patients with HMs. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of patients with HMs aged ≥ 65 years who visited an outpatient clinic at a tertiary medical center in Korea between November 2019 and March 2020. Patient-reported distress and problems were measured using the distress thermometer (DT) and 39-item Problem List by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Descriptive statistics, χ2 test or Fisher's exact test, and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted (N = 132). RESULTS: In total, 62.1% of patients had moderate to severe distress (DT score ≥ 4), experiencing an average of nine problems. Significant sources of distress on multivariate logistic analysis included problems with transportation, depression, and constipation, accounting for 47% of distress variance. Most patients had physical (97.0%) or emotional problems (79.5%). Among these, fatigue (60.6%), worry (59.8%), tingling (59.8%), difficulty with mobility (47.0%), and memory/concentration (40.2%) were the most frequently reported problems. CONCLUSIONS: Elderly patients with HMs have a high burden of distress, which is affected by different sources, compared with younger patients with solid tumors. Thus, in this population, assessment and management of distress need to be conducted considering the unique features of their source and burden. Further research on distress should consider the cancer type and population age.
PURPOSE: Treatment for hematological malignancies (HMs) and functional decline associated with age can cause distress in elderly patients with HMs. However, information about the nature and effects of distress in this population is scarce. Therefore, this study examined the level of distress, its source, and the practical/familial/physical/emotional problems among elderly patients with HMs. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of patients with HMs aged ≥ 65 years who visited an outpatient clinic at a tertiary medical center in Korea between November 2019 and March 2020. Patient-reported distress and problems were measured using the distress thermometer (DT) and 39-item Problem List by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Descriptive statistics, χ2 test or Fisher's exact test, and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted (N = 132). RESULTS: In total, 62.1% of patients had moderate to severe distress (DT score ≥ 4), experiencing an average of nine problems. Significant sources of distress on multivariate logistic analysis included problems with transportation, depression, and constipation, accounting for 47% of distress variance. Most patients had physical (97.0%) or emotional problems (79.5%). Among these, fatigue (60.6%), worry (59.8%), tingling (59.8%), difficulty with mobility (47.0%), and memory/concentration (40.2%) were the most frequently reported problems. CONCLUSIONS: Elderly patients with HMs have a high burden of distress, which is affected by different sources, compared with younger patients with solid tumors. Thus, in this population, assessment and management of distress need to be conducted considering the unique features of their source and burden. Further research on distress should consider the cancer type and population age.
Authors: Toni Musiello; Glenys Dixon; Moira O'Connor; Deb Cook; Lisa Miller; Anna Petterson; Christobel Saunders; David Joske; Claire Johnson Journal: Appl Nurs Res Date: 2016-09-24 Impact factor: 2.257
Authors: Michelle B Riba; Kristine A Donovan; Barbara Andersen; IIana Braun; William S Breitbart; Benjamin W Brewer; Luke O Buchmann; Matthew M Clark; Molly Collins; Cheyenne Corbett; Stewart Fleishman; Sofia Garcia; Donna B Greenberg; Rev George F Handzo; Laura Hoofring; Chao-Hui Huang; Robin Lally; Sara Martin; Lisa McGuffey; William Mitchell; Laura J Morrison; Megan Pailler; Oxana Palesh; Francine Parnes; Janice P Pazar; Laurel Ralston; Jaroslava Salman; Moreen M Shannon-Dudley; Alan D Valentine; Nicole R McMillian; Susan D Darlow Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2019-10-01 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Jesse D Troy; Carlos M de Castro; Mary Ruth Pupa; Greg P Samsa; Amy P Abernethy; Thomas W LeBlanc Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2018-03 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Lisa VanHoose; Lora L Black; Kimberly Doty; Dory Sabata; Philip Twumasi-Ankrah; Sarah Taylor; Rhonda Johnson Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-10-16 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Arti Hurria; Daneng Li; Kurt Hansen; Sujata Patil; Ravi Gupta; Christian Nelson; Stuart M Lichtman; William P Tew; Paul Hamlin; Enid Zuckerman; Jonathan Gardes; Sewanti Limaye; Mark Lachs; Eva Kelly Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-08-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jesse D Troy; Susan C Locke; Greg P Samsa; Joseph Feliciano; Akshara Richhariya; Thomas W LeBlanc Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-10-30 Impact factor: 3.603