Literature DB >> 8692533

Assessing psychological distress in cancer patients: validation of a self-administered questionnaire.

G Morasso1, M Costantini, G Baracco, C Borreani, M Capelli.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Screening for psychological distress in cancer patients is important, considering the high prevalence of psychiatric disorders responsive to treatment. The aim of this study is to test the psychometric properties of the Psychological Distress Inventory (PDI), a 13-item self-administered questionnaire developed to measure psychological distress in cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The PDI was tested in three samples of 434 cancer patients. In the first sample (n = 102) it was administered with the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and with the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ). Its validity as a screening method for psychiatric disorders was evaluated through a clinical interview in the second sample (n = 107). The third sample (n = 225) provided information on the ability of the PDI to discriminate among patients in different clinical phases of disease and allowed an estimate of the prevalence of psychiatric disorders in these groups of patients.
RESULTS: A 0.88 alpha coefficient was obtained in the whole study sample. The correlations with the STAI scales were > 0.70. A positive correlation with neuroticism (r = 0.59) and a negative correlation with extroversion (r = -0.34) was observed. In the second sample, 67 patients (62.6%) received a psychiatric diagnosis according to the ICD-X criteria. The mean PDI scores were significantly lower for the 40 patients with no psychiatric diagnosis (mean 24.5) as compared with the 49 patients with adjustment disorders (mean 36.4) and with the 12 patients with depressive disorders (mean 40.8). The area under curve, estimated through a Receiver-Operating Characteristics analysis, was 0.88. A cut-off of 29 was associated with a 75% sensitivity and a 85% specificity. In the third sample, the lowest PDI scores were in patients with no evidence of disease (mean 24.7, 95% CL 23.0-26.4) as compared to patients undergoing antineoplastic treatment (mean 30.9, 95% CL 28.9-32.9) and to patients under palliative therapy (mean 36.0, 95% CL 34.0-37.9). The estimated prevalence of patients with psychiatric disorders in these three groups were respectively 5.0, 56.6 and 98.8%.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the PDI is a reliable and valid tool for measuring psychological distress in cancer patients and to detect psychiatric disorders through a screening procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8692533     DOI: 10.1159/000227576

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oncology        ISSN: 0030-2414            Impact factor:   2.935


  25 in total

1.  Evaluation of a screening programme for psychological distress in cancer survivors.

Authors:  Gabriella Morasso; Silvia Di Leo; Anita Caruso; Andrea Decensi; Monica Beccaro; Laura Berretta; Laura Bongiorno; Maurizio Cosimelli; Stefania Finelli; Gabriella Rondanina; Wissya Santoni; Vittoria Stigliano; Massimo Costantini
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2009-11-18       Impact factor: 3.603

2.  Improving cancer patients' knowledge about totally implantable access port: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Michela Piredda; Valentina Biagioli; Diana Giannarelli; Daniele Incletoli; Francesca Grieco; Massimiliano Carassiti; Maria Grazia De Marinis
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2015-07-24       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  Occurrence and predictors of the fatigue in high-grade glioma patients.

Authors:  Irene Aprile; Silvia Chiesa; Luca Padua; Chiara Di Blasi; Maria Felice Arezzo; Vincenzo Valentini; Enrico Di Stasio; Mario Balducci
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2015-02-20       Impact factor: 3.307

4.  Recurrent brain tumour: the impact of illness on patient's life.

Authors:  Elena Lamperti; Giuseppe Pantaleo; Claudia Yvonne Finocchiaro; Antonio Silvani; Andrea Botturi; Paola Gaviani; Lucio Sarno; Andrea Salmaggi
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2011-07-03       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Nutritional Online Information for Cancer Patients: a Randomized Trial of an Internet Communication Plus Social Media Intervention.

Authors:  Patrizia Gnagnarella; Alessandro Maria Misotti; Luigi Santoro; Demosthenes Akoumianakis; Laura Del Campo; Francesco De Lorenzo; Claudio Lombardo; Giannis Milolidakis; Richard Sullivan; John Gordon McVie
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.037

6.  Sensitivity and specificity of the Distress Thermometer in screening for distress in long-term nasopharyngeal cancer survivors.

Authors:  J S Hong; J Tian
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.677

7.  The measure of psychological distress in cancer patients: the use of Distress Thermometer in the Oncological Rehabilitation Center of Florence.

Authors:  Francesco Bulli; Guido Miccinesi; Alice Maruelli; Manuel Katz; Eugenio Paci
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2008-12-03       Impact factor: 3.603

8.  Determinants and implications of cancer patients' psychosocial needs.

Authors:  N Ernstmann; M Neumann; O Ommen; M Galushko; M Wirtz; R Voltz; M Hallek; H Pfaff
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2009-03-13       Impact factor: 3.603

9.  Lack of a chemobrain effect for adjuvant FOLFOX chemotherapy in colon cancer patients. A pilot study.

Authors:  Federica Andreis; Marco Ferri; Maria Mazzocchi; Fausto Meriggi; Anna Rizzi; Luigina Rota; Brunella Di Biasi; Chiara Abeni; Claudio Codignola; Renzo Rozzini; Alberto Zaniboni
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2012-08-11       Impact factor: 3.603

10.  Personality characteristics as differential variables of the pain experience.

Authors:  Carmen Ramírez-Maestre; Alicia Eva López Martínez; Rosa Esteve Zarazaga
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2004-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.