The use of distress thermometer in advanced cancer inpatients with pain

The Impact of Pain on Mobility in Patients with Cancer

OBJECTIVES

Provide an overview of how pain impacts mobility in patients with cancer.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in PubMed and on Google Scholar using search terms, cancer pain with mobility, acute and chronic pain syndromes, enhanced recovery after surgery, nursing care, and rehabilitation. Peer-reviewed research studies, review articles, and pain guidelines and position papers were reviewed to provide an overview on cancer pain, its impact on mobility, and the nurse's role in managing pain and optimizing mobility and functional outcomes.

RESULTS

Firty-two references were included in this overview. This body of literature is replete with studies on the management of pain; however, the tie between pain and mobility has not been well described aside from the breakthrough pain literature. This manuscript weaves these two important concepts together to better inform nurses and other clinicians regarding the importance of managing pain to even begin mobilizing patients, especially following surgery and for other painful conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Oncology nurses play an integral role in assessing and managing cancer pain. It is important for nurses to recognize how their pain management interventions lead to improved mobility and functioning in patients with cancer.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Nurses comprise the largest workforce around the globe and are well-equipped to assess and manage cancer pain in all cancer care settings. As leaders within the healthcare team, making recommendations to better control pain and communicating with other team members regarding the pain plan is essential in improving mobility in patients with cancer.

Common patient-reported sources of cancer-related distress in adults with cancer: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Cancer-related distress (CRD) is widely experienced by people with cancer and is associated with poor outcomes. CRD screening is a recommended practice; however, CRD remains under-treated due to limited resources targeting unique sources (problems) contributing to CRD. Understanding which sources of CRD are most commonly reported will allow allocation of resources including equipping healthcare providers for intervention.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review to describe the frequency of patient-reported sources of CRD and to identify relationships with CRD severity, demographics, and clinical characteristics. We included empirical studies that screened adults with cancer using the NCCN or similar problem list. Most and least common sources of CRD were identified using weighted proportions computed across studies. Relationships between sources of CRD and CRD severity, demographics, and clinical characteristics were summarized narratively.

RESULTS

Forty-eight studies were included. The most frequent sources of CRD were worry (55%), fatigue (54%), fears (45%), sadness (44%), pain (41%), and sleep disturbance (40%). Having enough food (0%), substance abuse (3%), childbearing ability (5%), fevers (5%), and spiritual concerns (5%) were infrequently reported. Sources of CRD were related to CRD severity, sex, age, race, marital status, income, education, rurality, treatment type, cancer grade, performance status, and timing of screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Sources of CRD were most frequently emotional and physical, and resources should be targeted to these sources. Relationships between sources of CRD and demographic and clinical variables may suggest profiles of patient subgroups that share similar sources of CRD. Further investigation is necessary to direct intervention development and testing.

Assessment of emotional distress in palliative care: Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised (ESAS-r) vs Distress Thermometer

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the Distress Thermometer (DT) as a screening tool for emotional distress in oncological palliative care patients and to compare the DT with the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised (ESAS-r) and the gold standard to determine the most appropriate assessment method in palliative psychological care.

METHODS

Data were collected from psychological screening tests (ESAS-r and DT), and clinical interviews (gold standard) were conducted by a clinical psychologist specialist in palliative oncology from January 2021 to January 2022 in an oncology palliative care service.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 356 first-time patients with a diagnosis of advanced cancer in palliative care. The most frequently reported oncological diagnoses were gastrointestinal tract (49.3%) and breast (18.3%). Most patients were female (n = 206; 57.9%), 60.4% were married/with a partner, 55.4% had between 6 and 9 years of schooling, and a median age of 57 (range, 46-65) years. The cutoff of the DT was 5, with a sensitivity of 75.88% and specificity of 54.3%. Emotional problems (sadness and nervousness) had a greater area under the curve (AUC) when measured using the DT than the ESAS-r; however, only in the case of the comparative sadness and discouragement was the difference between the AUC marginally significant.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

The use of the DT as a screening tool in oncological palliative care is more effective in the evaluation of psychological needs than the ESAS-r. The DT, in addition to evaluation by an expert psychologist, allows for a more comprehensive identification of signs and symptoms to yield an accurate mental health diagnosis based on the International Classification of Diseases-11th Revision and/or Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Fifth Edition.

The Experience of COVID-19 in a Sample of Gynecological Cancer Patients Undergoing Chemotherapy: A Focus on the Psychological Implications

Cancer patients are at an increased risk of developing severe consequences due to the COVID-19 infection. However, psychological outcomes in this population have been overlooked in the literature. The present study aims to identify significant psychological differences between gynecological cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy before and during the pandemic. Additionally, we explore the correlations between COVID-19-related concerns and anxiety, depression, distress, and quality of life levels. Forty-two patients completed the STAI-Y, the EORTC QLQ-C30, the BDI II, the DT, and an ad-hoc questionnaire that investigated COVID-19-related concerns. The analyses did not show significant differences in the psychometric scales between the two groups, highlighting a considerable resilience against mental health and quality of life deterioration during the COVID-19 pandemic in gynecologic cancer patients. However, COVID-19-related concerns were positively associated with anxiety and inversely related to emotional functioning levels. These results emphasize the importance of a comprehensive patient care and the need to implement a multidisciplinary approach that includes psychological support in the treatment plan. Moreover, it is essential to encourage clear communication to convey comprehensive information about the impact of the pandemic on physical and psychological levels, as well as to offer psychoeducational tools to face the pandemic.

Psychological distress and associated factors among Palestinian advanced cancer patients: A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

There is limited research exploring the experiences of people living with advanced cancer in the Gaza Strip (GS), Palestine. Thus, this study aimed to determine the level of psychological distress, anxiety, and depression among advanced cancer patients in the GS and identify factors associated with a high level of distress.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A secondary analysis was performed using primary data from a larger study focusing on supportive care needs in advanced cancer patients in GS. Three hundred sixty-one patients agreed to participate and filled out the Distress Thermometer (DT) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to identify factors associated with high distress levels.

RESULTS

Over two-thirds of advanced cancer patients (70.6%) reported a high level of distress. They also reported a significantly higher distress level than patients with early cancer (96.5 vs. 3.5%; p = 0.001). About 92.8% of participants reported depression and anxiety symptoms. Physical, emotional, and practical problems were the primary sources of distress. Breast cancer patients were more likely to have psychological distress than colon and stomach cancer patients. Newly diagnosed patients had a higher level of anxiety, depression, and distress than those who had a cancer diagnosis for an extended period.

CONCLUSION

Patients with advanced cancer in the GS exhibited a significantly higher level of psychological distress, depression and anxiety than patients with advanced cancer elsewhere. Efforts should be made to identify psychological distress as a routine part of oncology practice. Future research should further explore the causes of psychological distress in cancer patients in conflict zones and feasible mitigation strategies.

Retrospective Observational Study on the Characteristics of Pain and Associated Factors of Breakthrough Pain in Advanced Cancer Patients

Objective

This study aimed to conduct a retrospective observational study to understand the status of characteristics of pain and identify potential variables influencing the clinical presentation of breakthrough cancer pain (BTP) in advanced cancer patients.

Methods

Advanced cancer patients over 18 years of age; diagnosed with cancer of any type and stage III or IV in the palliative care ward with available data were enrolled between 2018 and 2020. Demographic data and pain-related information were collected by using structured electronic extraction form from Hospital Information System (HIS). Patients who had well-controlled background pain with an intensity ≤4 on a 0–10 numerical scale for >12 hours/day, the presence of transient exacerbations of pain with moderate-severe intensity (≧5), and clearly distinguish from background pain were regarded to have suffered BTP. Spearman correlation was conducted to explore the relationship between pain score and demographics characteristics. Factors significant in univariate analysis were included in the multiple regression model to explore independent predictive factors associated with the BTP.

Results

Of 798 advanced cancer patients, the mean age was 56.7 (SD = 11.84) years. Lung cancer (29.95%) was the most common cancer, and pain (93%) was the most common symptom. More than half (n = 428, 53.6%) of the patients experienced BTP. The median number of BTP episodes was 4 (IQR = 2, 7, range: 1–42). The median intensity of BTP was 6 (IQR = 6, 7, range 5–10). Patients with severe background pain or BTP had longer hospital stay and more symptoms. Besides, more severe background pain was related to higher activity of daily living. Intramuscular injection of hydromorphone hydrochloride was the main medication for BTP onset. Younger age, background pain, anorexia, and constipation were independently associated with the presentation of BTP. BTP pain intensity was independently associated with bloating. Symptom numbers were an independent factor and positively associated with BTP episodes.

Conclusions

BTP resulted in poor prognosis, which has a variable presentation depending on interdependent relationships among different characteristics. Good controlling of background pain and assessment of pain-related symptoms are essential for BTP management. BTP should be managed individually, especially the invisible pain among aged patients. Furthermore, BTP-related education and training were still needed.

Assessment Practice of Patient-Centered Outcomes in Surgical Neuro-Oncology: Survey-Based Recommendations for Clinical Routine

The psycho-oncological burden related to the diagnosis of an intracranial tumor is often accompanied by neurocognitive deficits and changes in character, overall affecting health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and activities of daily living. Regular administration of adequate screening tools is crucial to ensure a timely detection of needs for support and/or specific interventions. Although efforts have been made to assure the quality of neuro-oncological care, clinical assessment practice of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) remains overall heterogeneous, calling for a concise recommendation tailored to neuro-oncological patients. Therefore, this survey, promoted by the German Society of Neurosurgery, was conducted to evaluate the status quo of health care resources and PRO/neurocognition assessment practices throughout departments of surgical neuro-oncology in Germany. 72/127 (57%) of registered departments participated in the study, including 83% of all university hospital units. A second aim was to shed light on the impact of quality assurance strategies (i.e., department certification as part of an integrative neuro-oncology cancer center; CNOC) on the assessment practice, controlled for interacting structural factors, i.e., university hospital status (UH) and caseload. Despite an overall good to excellent availability of relevant health care structures (psycho-oncologist: 90%, palliative care unit: 97%, neuropsychology: 75%), a small majority of departments practice patient-centered screenings (psycho-oncological burden: 64%, HRQoL: 76%, neurocognition: 58%), however, much less frequently outside the framework of clinical trials. In this context, CNOC affiliation, representing a specific health care quality assurance process, was associated with significantly stronger PRO assessment practices regarding psycho-oncological burden, independent of UH status (common odds ratio=5.0, p=0.03). Nevertheless, PRO/neurocognitive assessment practice was not consistent even across CNOC. The overall most commonly used PRO/neurocognitive assessment tools were the Distress Thermometer (for psycho-oncological burden; 64%), the EORTC QLQ-C30 combined with the EORTC QLQ-BN20 (for HRQoL; 52%) and the Mini-Mental Status Test (for neurocognition; 67%), followed by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA; 33%). Accordingly, for routine clinical screening, the authors recommend the Distress Thermometer and the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BN20, complemented by the MoCA as a comparatively sensitive yet basic neurocognitive test. This recommendation is intended to encourage more regular, adequate, and standardized routine assessments in neuro-oncological practice.

Validation of the Distress Thermometer in patients with advanced cancer receiving specialist palliative care in a hospice setting

BACKGROUND

Ongoing assessment of psychological reaction to illness in palliative and end of life care settings is recommended, yet validated tools are not routinely used in clinical practice. The Distress Thermometer is a short screening tool developed for use in oncology, to detect individuals who would benefit from further psychological assessment. However the optimal cut-off to detect indicative psychological morbidity in patients with advanced cancer receiving specialist palliative care is unclear.

AIM

To provide the first validation of the Distress Thermometer in an advanced cancer population receiving specialist palliative care in a UK hospice setting.

DESIGN

Receiver Operating Characteristics analysis was used to compare the sensitivity and specificity of cut-offs indicative of psychological morbidity on the Distress Thermometer in comparison to the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Data were derived from 202 patients with advanced cancer who were approached on admission to inpatient or day hospice care, with 139 patients providing complete data on both measures.

RESULTS

The area under the curve was optimal using a Distress Thermometer cut-off score of ⩾6 for total distress and for anxiety, and a cut-off score of ⩾4 optimal when screening for depression.

CONCLUSIONS

The Distress Thermometer is a valid, accurate screening tool to be used in advanced cancer but with caution in relation to the lack of specificity. With little variation between the area under the curve scores, arguably a Distress Thermometer cut-off score of ⩾5 is most appropriate in screening for all types of psychological morbidity if sensitivity is to be prioritised.

Psychological Distress in a Sample of Inpatients With Mixed Cancer-A Cross-Sectional Study of Routine Clinical Data

Background

The diagnosis and treatment of cancer are associated with psychological distress that often leads to a significant reduction in emotional and physical well-being and quality of life. Early detection of psychological distress is therefore important. This study aims to assess the psychological distress of inpatient cancer patients using routine clinical data. Furthermore, variables and problems most strongly associated with psychological distress should be identified.

Materials and Methods

N = 1,869 inpatients were investigated (mean age = 60.89 years; 35.94% female) using the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer and problem checklist to assess distress as well as multiple possible problem areas. Visceral oncological cancer (31.6%) was the most common tumor diagnosis, followed by skin cancer (26.2%) and urological cancer (21.7%).

Results

65.9% of the sample experienced high levels of distress (Distress Thermometer ≥ 5). Female sex, stage 4 of disease, and visceral and head and neck cancer emerged as risk factors for high distress. A younger age (<65 years) was significantly correlated with higher distress. The most frequently self-reported problems were fears (50.1%), worry (49.9%), and fatigue (49.1%). Patients with all 3 of these problems had 24 times higher risk [odds ratio (OR) = 23.9] for high levels of distress than patients without these problems. Women reported significantly more practical, emotional, and physical problems than men. Younger (<50 years) and middle-aged patients (50-64 years) reported increased levels of practical, family, and emotional problems compared with older patients (≥65 years).

Discussion

Almost two-thirds of the sample reported high levels of distress. The most frequently reported problem areas were emotional and physical problems. These results can help to identify patients with high risk for psychological distress and, therefore, be used to optimize psychosocial and psycho-oncological care for patients with cancer.

Performance of Distress Thermometer and Associated Factors of Psychological Distress among Chinese Cancer Patients

Objective

We aimed to examine the performance of the distress thermometer (DT) and identify the prevalence and risk factors associated with psychological distress (PD) in heterogeneous cancer patients.

Methods

This cross-sectional study enrolled 1496 heterogeneous cancer patients from the inpatient and outpatient departments. Receiver operating characteristic analysis (ROC) of DT was evaluated against the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Total (HADS-T ≥15). An area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and clinical utility index were calculated. Multiple binary logistic regression was used to identify the factors associated with PD.

Results

Referring to ROC analysis, DT showed good discriminating accuracy (AUC = 0.88). A cutoff score of 4 was established, and it yielded sensitivity (0.81), specificity (0.88), PPV (0.87), NPV (0.82), and clinical utility indexes (screening utility = 0.71 and case-finding utility = 0.73). 46.5% of our participants was distressed. Lower education levels (odd ratio (OR) = 1.39), advanced stage (OR = 1.85), active disease status (OR = 1.82), lack of exercise (OR = 3.03), diagnosis known (OR = 0.64), emotional problems (OR = 3.54), and physical problems (OR = 8.62) were the predictive factors for PD.

Conclusion

DT with a cutoff score (≥4) is a comprehensive, appropriate, and practical initial screener for PD in cancer patients. Predicting factors should be considered together for effective management of PD in such population.

Episodic Cancer Pain: Patient Reporting, Prevalence, and Clinicodemographic Associations at Initial Cancer Pain Clinic Assessment

Background

Better understanding of the episodic cancer pain (CP) spectrum, including pains that occur in addition to its conventionally defined breakthrough CP (BTcP) and incident CP (IcP) components, may inform CP assessment and management. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of episodic patient-reported CP and the prevalence and associations of study-defined BTcP (S-BTcP) and IcP (S-IcP) in patients with CP.

Methods

In a cross-sectional study at their first CP clinic attendance, participants with CP had the following assessments: Brief Pain Inventory (BPI); Pain Management Index (PMI), with PMI-negative status indicating undertreatment; standardized neuropathic pain component (NPC) status; S-BTcP (no trigger identified) and S-IcP (trigger identified) status, based on a preceding 7-day history of transitory pain flares distinct from background pain, and BPI-Worst or BPI-Now pain intensity ≥ 4. Clinicodemographic variables' association with S-BTcP and S-IcP was examined in logistic regression analyses.

Results

Of 371 participants, 308 (83%) had episodic CP by history alone; 140 (37.7%) and 181 (48.8%) had S-BTcP and S-IcP, respectively. Multivariable analyses demonstrated significant (p < 0.05) associations (odds ratios: 95% CIs) for 6 variables with S-BTcP: head and neck pain location (2.53; 1.20–5.37), NPC (2.39; 1.34–4.26), BPI average pain (1.64; 1.36–1.99), abdominal pain (0.324; 0.120–0.873), S-IcP (0.207; 0.116–0.369), and PMI-negative status (0.443; 0.213–0.918). Similar independent associations (p < 0.05) occurred for S-IcP with NPC, BPI average pain, and PMI-negative status, in addition to radiotherapy, S-BTcP, soft tissue pain, and sleep interference.

Conclusions

Episodic or transient patient-reported CP flares often do not meet the more conventional criteria that define BTcP and IcP, the principal episodic CP types. Both BTcP and IcP occur frequently and both are associated with a NPC, higher pain intensity, and less opioid underuse in the management of CP. Further studies are warranted to both better understand the complex presentations of episodic CP and inform its classification.

Patient-reported outcomes from the distress assessment and response tool program in Chinese cancer inpatients

PURPOSE

Distress screening using measures of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) has been introduced in China and is increasingly recognized as contributing to whole-patient care. We carried out a multi-centered cross-sectional survey of Chinese cancer inpatients to explore the symptom burden, symptom clusters, and risk factors of distress.

METHOD

Patients were recruited from five hospitals in four provinces. The Distress Assessment and Response Tool (DART) was used as the screening tool. Demographic and medical information was collected. Descriptive analysis, the chi-square test, logistics regression analysis, and hierarchical clustering analysis were used.

RESULTS

Totally 1045 valid questionnaires were collected (83.6% validity ratio). Low well-being (39.4%), lack of appetite (35.4%), tiredness (32.9%), pain (21.1%), and anxiety (19.8%) were the top five symptoms. Patients in Ci County had a heavier symptom burden than patients at other sites. Depression, anxiety, nausea, drowsiness, and pain were considered pain-illness symptoms; lack of appetite, low well-being, tiredness, and shortness of breath were considered fatigue-illness symptoms. Social difficulty was a risk factor for all symptoms. A high proportion of suicide ideation (38.8%) and suicide intention (10.5%) was identified among patients with potential depression.

CONCLUSION

The high symptom burden of Chinese cancer inpatients indicates the necessity of distress screening; well-designed screening programs such as the multidimensional DART and its acceptability in China should be further explored. Social difficulty has a universal impact on patients' well-being, and psychosocial care should be integrated into holistic symptoms management.