Premium
Sensitivity and specificity of the Distress Thermometer and a two‐item depression screen (Patient Health Questionnaire‐2) with a ‘help’ question for psychological distress and psychiatric morbidity in patients with advanced cancer
Author(s) -
Ryan Dermot Anthony,
Gallagher Pamela,
Wright Shelagh,
Cassidy Eugene M.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
psycho‐oncology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.41
H-Index - 137
eISSN - 1099-1611
pISSN - 1057-9249
DOI - 10.1002/pon.2042
Subject(s) - patient health questionnaire , distress , anxiety , medicine , depression (economics) , mood , hospital anxiety and depression scale , psychiatry , clinical psychology , depressive symptoms , economics , macroeconomics
Objectives Brief screening tools may help clinicians in busy settings detect patients who are experiencing severe psychological distress. This study examined the performance of the Distress Thermometer (DT) and a two‐item depression screen [the Patient Health Questionnaire‐2 (PHQ‐2)] with a ‘help’ question in screening for distress and psychiatric morbidity among patients with advanced cancer. Methods Two hundred and five patients with advanced cancer completed the DT, the PHQ‐2 and ‘help’ question and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and were interviewed using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM‐IV (SCID). The performance of the screening tools was examined against the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the SCID. Results Overall, discrimination levels were comparable for the DT [area under the curve (AUC) 0.80–0.81] and the PHQ‐2 (AUC 0.73–0.85). The DT performed best in detecting cases of distress and mood, anxiety or adjustment disorders (sensitivity 100%), but it had poor specificity (49–60%). The best performance in terms of combined sensitivity and specificity was the PHQ depression item versus the SCID (sensitivity 88%, specificity 73%). The inclusion of the ‘help’ question with the PHQ‐2 resulted in high levels of specificity (≥89%), but there was a significant drop in sensitivity (≤54%). Conclusion Ultra‐brief screening tools offer an efficient means of identifying patients with advanced cancer with severe distress or psychiatric morbidity but are less effective at identifying non‐distressed individuals. Used in conjunction with a ‘help’ question, these tools can help clinicians identify patients who are both distressed and likely to accept professional support. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.