Feasibility of Using Risk Factors to Screen for Psychological Disorder During Routine Breast Care Nurse Consultations

Acceptability and face validity of two mental health screening tools for use in the routine surgical setting

Background

Preoperative assessment of mental health rarely occurs within routine surgery. Any screening tool selected to form part of this process must be deemed practical, acceptable and valid by clinicians and consumers alike. This study aims to assess the acceptability and face validity of two existing mental health screening tools to select one for further development and use in the routine surgical setting.

Methods

A survey of clinicians and consumers was conducted from October 2020 to March 2021 at a tertiary hospital in Sydney, Australia. Using a Likert scale (1–5, lowest to highest rating), the clinicians evaluated four domains for acceptability and two for validity (six overall) and the consumers four domains for acceptability and one for validity (five overall) on the preoperative use of the amended Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) and the Somatic and Psychological Health Report-12 (SPHERE-12). Consensus was achieved through a rating of 4 or 5 being given by 70% or more of participants with domains able to remain unchanged. Free text responses were analysed into themes.

Results

A total of 73 participants (51 clinicians; 22 consumers) were included. The K10 received consensus scores (≥ 70%) in four out of six domains for clinicians (4/4 acceptability; 0/2 validity), and all five domains for consumers (4/4 acceptability; 1/1 validity). The SPHERE-12 received consensus scores (≥ 70%) in three domains for clinicians (3/4 acceptability; 0/2 validity), and three domains for consumers (3/4 acceptability; 0/1 validity). Six qualitative themes were described including (1) amendments to tool structure and language; (2) scale response options; (3) difficulty with somatic questions; (4) practicality and familiarity with K10; (5) challenges for specific patient cohorts and (6) timing considerations for patients.

Conclusion

Adequate acceptability was established for the K10. However further development is required to strengthen its validity for this specific surgical cohort and purpose. Future research to determine the feasibility and acceptability of implementing and using the K10 in the routine surgical setting is now needed.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40359-021-00672-w.

Surgical outcomes for people with serious mental illness are poorer than for other patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association between having a serious mental illness and surgical outcomes for adults, including in-hospital and 30-day mortality, post-operative complications, and hospital length of stay.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of publications in English to 30 July 2018 of studies that examined associations between having a serious mental illness and surgical outcomes for adults who underwent elective surgery. Primary outcomes were in-hospital and 30-day mortality, post-operative complications, and length of hospital stay. Risk of bias was assessed with the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. Studies were grouped by serious mental illness diagnosis and outcome measures. Odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were calculated in random effects models to provide pooled effect estimates.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, and the Cochrane Library.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Of the 3824 publications identified by our search, 26 (including 6 129 806 unique patients) were included in our analysis. The associations between having any serious mental illness diagnosis and having any post-operative complication (ten studies, 125 624 patients; pooled effect: OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.15-1.79) and a longer stay in hospital (ten studies, 5 385 970 patients; MD, 2.6 days; 95% CI, 0.8-4.4 days) were statistically significant, but not those for in-hospital mortality (three studies, 42 926 patients; OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.69-2.12) or 30-day mortality (six studies, 83 013 patients; OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 0.86-3.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Having a serious mental illness is associated with higher rates of post-operative complications and longer stays in hospital, but not with higher in-hospital or 30-day mortality. Targeted pre-operative interventions may improve surgical outcomes for these vulnerable patients.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42018080114 (prospective).

Screening-detected non-symptomatic breast cancer: a case history

Alice is a 65 year-old woman who was recalled for further investigations following a routine screening mammogram, which showed a 25 mm mass in her left breast. This case history will report on the further investigations and surgery required to manage this infiltrating ductal carcinoma. The histopathology report will be analysed to provide a rationale for future treatment with radiotherapy, and Alice's expected prognosis will be presented using the Nottingham Prognostic Index. Alice's psychological support needs will identified and the appropriate interventions will be discussed with a particular focus on Alice's history of depression. The supportive and educational role of the breast care nurse and the multidisciplinary team will be highlighted throughout the study.

Patient and health professional's perceived barriers to the delivery of psychosocial care to adults with cancer: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To explore the barriers experienced and perceived by health professionals and patients in the delivery of psychosocial care to adults with cancer.

METHODS

Systematic searches were undertaken using the PsychInfo, Medline and CINAHL electronic databases, up to October 2013. Research reporting health professional or patient experiences and perceptions of barriers to psychosocial care are included in the review. The systematic review includes studies that have non-experimental, exploratory and observational designs, as is appropriate to answer the review question. Included studies were critically appraised. The results of individual quantitative studies were aggregated. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyse the qualitative results.

RESULTS

Twenty-five papers met the pre-specified inclusion criteria for the final review. The most commonly perceived barrier for patients relates to receiving adequate support from elsewhere and a lack of perceived need for psychosocial care. Health professionals report barriers at an organisational level most frequently followed by cultural and then individual clinician-related barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Barriers exist on a variety of levels. People with cancer need clear appropriate information and communication about psychosocial services, including information about the role of psychosocial care in addition to existing supports. Interventions that target the complex interplay of individual, organisational and cultural factors need to be developed. Strategies that improve health professional communication skills, identify clear referral pathways, improve acceptability of interventions and clearly identify the need for services could address many of the barriers identified in this review.

Meta-analysis of screening and case finding tools for depression in cancer: evidence based recommendations for clinical practice on behalf of the Depression in Cancer Care consensus group

BACKGROUND

To examine the validity of screening and case-finding tools used in the identification of depression as defined by an ICD10/DSM-IV criterion standard.

METHODS

We identified 63 studies involving 19 tools (in 33 publications) designed to help clinicians identify depression in cancer settings. We used a standardized rating system. We excluded 11 tools without at least two independent studies, leaving 8 tools for comparison.

RESULTS

Across all cancer stages there were 56 diagnostic validity studies (n=10,009). For case-finding, one stem question, two stem questions and the BDI-II all had level 2 evidence (2a, 2b and 2c respectively) and given their better acceptability we gave the stem questions a grade B recommendation. For screening, two stem questions had level 1b evidence (with high acceptability) and the BDI-II had level 2c evidence. For every 100 people screened in advanced cancer, the two questions would accurately detect 18 cases, while missing only 1 and correctly reassure 74 with 7 falsely identified. For every 100 people screened in non-palliative settings the BDI-II would accurately detect 17 cases, missing 2 and correctly re-assure 70, with 11 falsely identified as cases. The main cautions are the reliance on DSM-IV definitions of major depression, the large number of small studies and the paucity of data for many tools in specific settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Although no single tool could be offered unqualified support, several tools are likely to improve upon unassisted clinical recognition. In clinical practice, all tools should form part of an integrated approach involving further follow-up, clinical assessment and evidence based therapy.

Associations between hospital and patient characteristics and breast cancer patients' satisfaction with nursing staff

BACKGROUND

Only a few studies have investigated the association between hospital characteristics and breast cancer patients' satisfaction with nursing staff.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine whether the satisfaction of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients with nursing staff correlates with hospital characteristics after taking the relevant patient characteristics into account.

METHODS

Multilevel regression analysis was applied, combining survey data from newly diagnosed breast cancer patients regarding their characteristics and satisfaction with nursing staff with data on the characteristics of the hospitals in which the patients were treated.

RESULTS

Data from 2945 patients from 81 hospitals were analyzed in multilevel logistic regression models. The patients were significantly more likely to be satisfied with the nursing staff in hospitals that employed breast care nurses (BCNs) at the time of the survey. At the patient level, patients were significantly more likely to be satisfied with nursing staff if the patients were native speakers and rated their own health more highly. Cross-level interaction analysis suggested that the increased patient satisfaction with nursing staff that resulted from employing BCNs was largely limited to native German-speaking patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The results demonstrate that patient satisfaction with nursing staff is higher if BCNs are employed in the treatment hospital. However, only the satisfaction of native speakers was significantly higher when BCNs were employed.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

These findings suggest that hospitals should invest in employing specialist nurses. Special attention should be paid to the care of non-native-speaking patients.

Depression screening and patient outcomes in cancer: a systematic review

Background

Several practice guidelines recommend screening for depression in cancer care, but no systematic reviews have examined whether there is evidence that depression screening benefits cancer patients. The objective was to evaluate the potential benefits of depression screening in cancer patients by assessing the (1) accuracy of depression screening tools; (2) effectiveness of depression treatment; and (3) effect of depression screening, either alone or in the context of comprehensive depression care, on depression outcomes.

Methods

Data sources were CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, ISI, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and SCOPUS databases through January 24, 2011; manual journal searches; reference lists; citation tracking; trial registry reviews. Articles on cancer patients were included if they (1) compared a depression screening instrument to a valid criterion for major depressive disorder (MDD); (2) compared depression treatment with placebo or usual care in a randomized controlled trial (RCT); (3) assessed the effect of screening on depression outcomes in a RCT.

Results

There were 19 studies of screening accuracy, 1 MDD treatment RCT, but no RCTs that investigated effects of screening on depression outcomes. Screening accuracy studies generally had small sample sizes (median = 17 depression cases) and used exploratory methods to set sample-specific cutoff scores that varied substantially across studies. A nurse-delivered intervention for MDD reduced depressive symptoms moderately (effect size = 0.37).

Conclusions

The one treatment study reviewed reported modest improvement in depressive symptoms, but no evidence was found on whether or not depression screening in cancer patients, either alone or in the context of optimal depression care, improves depression outcomes compared to usual care. Depression screening in cancer should be evaluated in a RCT in which all patients identified as depressed, either through screening or via physician recognition and referral in a control group, have access to comprehensive depression care.