How well do cancer survivor self-classifications of anxiety, depression and stress agree with a standardised tool? Results of a cross-sectional study.


Journal

PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2019
Historique:
received: 06 03 2019
accepted: 21 08 2019
entrez: 21 9 2019
pubmed: 21 9 2019
medline: 17 3 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

There is poor uptake of psychosocial interventions offered to people with cancer who record high scores on distress screening scales. Intervention uptake may be influenced by a mismatch between consumer (bottom-up) and professional (top-down) paradigms of wellbeing. The current research aims to compare cancer survivors' 'self-judgements' about their levels of anxiety, depression and stress, to classifications derived via a professional-driven measure, the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). A cross-sectional study was undertaken with haematological cancer survivors recruited from three population-based cancer registries in Australia. Consenting participants were mailed a questionnaire package; and non-responders received a second questionnaire package after 3-weeks and a reminder call after 6-weeks. The consumer-driven perspective was assessed via three separate single items asking survivors to self-classify their levels of anxiety, depression and stress over the past week on a scale from 'normal' to 'extremely severe'. The professional-driven classification was assessed via the DASS-21. Kappa statistics were used to assess agreement between consumer- and professional-driven measures. Of 2,971 eligible haematological cancer survivors, 1,239 (42%) provided written consent and were mailed a questionnaire package. Of these, 984 (79%) returned a completed questionnaire. The simple kappa for agreement between the DASS-21 and self-classified measures for anxiety was 0.47 (95% CI: 0.39 to 0.54, p<0.0001). The weighted kappa for agreement between the DASS-21 and self-classified measures of depression was 0.60 (95% CI: 0.53 to 0.67, p<0.0001) and for measures of stress was 0.51 (95% CI: 0.44 to 0.59, p<0.0001). Moderate agreement between self-classification and professional-driven assessments was found. The value of screening is predicated on the assumption that those with identified needs will be offered and take up services that will benefit them. Our results suggest that to improve the utility of distress screening it may be important to include assessment of survivor views about their symptoms.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
There is poor uptake of psychosocial interventions offered to people with cancer who record high scores on distress screening scales. Intervention uptake may be influenced by a mismatch between consumer (bottom-up) and professional (top-down) paradigms of wellbeing. The current research aims to compare cancer survivors' 'self-judgements' about their levels of anxiety, depression and stress, to classifications derived via a professional-driven measure, the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21).
METHODS
A cross-sectional study was undertaken with haematological cancer survivors recruited from three population-based cancer registries in Australia. Consenting participants were mailed a questionnaire package; and non-responders received a second questionnaire package after 3-weeks and a reminder call after 6-weeks. The consumer-driven perspective was assessed via three separate single items asking survivors to self-classify their levels of anxiety, depression and stress over the past week on a scale from 'normal' to 'extremely severe'. The professional-driven classification was assessed via the DASS-21. Kappa statistics were used to assess agreement between consumer- and professional-driven measures.
RESULTS
Of 2,971 eligible haematological cancer survivors, 1,239 (42%) provided written consent and were mailed a questionnaire package. Of these, 984 (79%) returned a completed questionnaire. The simple kappa for agreement between the DASS-21 and self-classified measures for anxiety was 0.47 (95% CI: 0.39 to 0.54, p<0.0001). The weighted kappa for agreement between the DASS-21 and self-classified measures of depression was 0.60 (95% CI: 0.53 to 0.67, p<0.0001) and for measures of stress was 0.51 (95% CI: 0.44 to 0.59, p<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS
Moderate agreement between self-classification and professional-driven assessments was found. The value of screening is predicated on the assumption that those with identified needs will be offered and take up services that will benefit them. Our results suggest that to improve the utility of distress screening it may be important to include assessment of survivor views about their symptoms.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31539386
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222107
pii: PONE-D-19-06612
pmc: PMC6754128
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e0222107

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Références

J Clin Oncol. 2001 Nov 1;19(21):4117-25
pubmed: 11689579
Br J Clin Psychol. 2005 Jun;44(Pt 2):227-39
pubmed: 16004657
Cancer. 2007 Jan 1;109(1):1-12
pubmed: 17146781
Palliat Med. 2007 Jun;21(4):341-6
pubmed: 17656411
Fertil Steril. 2008 Oct;90(4):1256-8
pubmed: 18083170
Cancer. 2008 Aug 15;113(4):870-8
pubmed: 18618581
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Apr 10;30(11):1160-77
pubmed: 22412146
Acta Oncol. 2013 Feb;52(2):216-24
pubmed: 23320770
Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2013 May;22(3):281-8
pubmed: 23431992
J Psychosom Res. 2013 Jul;75(1):1-17
pubmed: 23751231
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2014 Jan;12(1):34-45
pubmed: 24453291
Psychooncology. 2014 Jun;23(6):601-12
pubmed: 24519814
Ann Oncol. 2014 Apr;25(4):889-95
pubmed: 24667721
Psychooncology. 2015 Mar;24(3):262-8
pubmed: 25082459
Psychooncology. 2015 Jul;24(7):812-8
pubmed: 25504987
J Psychosom Res. 2016 Feb;81:24-30
pubmed: 26800635
Support Care Cancer. 2016 Oct;24(10):4413-22
pubmed: 27245984
PLoS One. 2019 Jan 4;14(1):e0210111
pubmed: 30608969
J Clin Oncol. 1996 Oct;14(10):2747-55
pubmed: 8874336

Auteurs

Mariko Carey (M)

Health Behaviour Research Collaborative, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia.

Jamie Bryant (J)

Health Behaviour Research Collaborative, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia.

Alison Zucca (A)

Health Behaviour Research Collaborative, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia.

Alix Hall (A)

Health Behaviour Research Collaborative, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia.

Alice Grady (A)

Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia.
Hunter New England Local Health District, Population Health, Wallsend, NSW, Australia.

Sophie Dilworth (S)

Health Behaviour Research Collaborative, School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia.

Kerry Peek (K)

Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH