4.6 Article

The psychometric properties of the Icelandic version of the Distress Thermometer and Problem List

Journal

PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY
Volume 21, Issue 7, Pages 730-736

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pon.1950

Keywords

cancer; oncology; distress; Distress Thermometer; screening

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: While a significant number of cancer patients experience distress only a minority are offered appropriate psychosocial interventions. Untreated distress can interfere with compliance to treatment and quality of life. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties and feasibility of the Icelandic translation of the Distress Thermometer (DT) and Problem List, a tool developed to screen for distress in cancer patients. ?Methods: Participants were 149 cancer patients receiving treatment at outpatient oncology clinics at Landspitali-The National University Hospital of Iceland, mean +/- SD age 59.06 years +/- 12.92. Participants answered the DT, HADS and GHQ-30, demographic questions and questions regarding the DT. ?Results: Scores on the DT ranged from 0 to 10 with a mean +/- SD score of 3.09 +/- 2.40, 7.30 +/- 4.86 on HADS and 5.28 +/- 5.60 on GHQ-30. Significant correlations were between the DT and all categories on the Problem List as well as between the DT and HADS (r = 0.45), and between DT and GHQ-30 (r = 0.57). ROC-analysis supported that a cut-off point of 3 gives the best sensitivity and specificity for the DT predicting depression or anxiety according to the HADS and GHQ. Sixty-nine (48.3%) patients scored ?2 on DT and 74 (51.7%) scored =3. ?Conclusion: The Icelandic version of the DT is a valid instrument to screen for distress in clinical practice. The study adds to a growing literature suggesting that this brief instrument may aid in identifying cancer patients suffering from distress and consequently providing appropriate treatment. Copyright (c) 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available