Cargando…

Evaluation of psychosocial distress in patients treated in a community-based oncology group practice in Germany

Background: Systematic evaluation of psychosocial distress in oncology outpatients is an important issue. We assessed feasibility and benefit of standardized routine screening using the Distress Thermometer (DT) and Problem List (PL) in all patients of our community-based hematooncology group practi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mergenthaler, U., Heymanns, J., Köppler, H., Thomalla, J., van Roye, C., Schenk, J., Weide, R.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3065878/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20926545
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdq455
_version_ 1782201032265170944
author Mergenthaler, U.
Heymanns, J.
Köppler, H.
Thomalla, J.
van Roye, C.
Schenk, J.
Weide, R.
author_facet Mergenthaler, U.
Heymanns, J.
Köppler, H.
Thomalla, J.
van Roye, C.
Schenk, J.
Weide, R.
author_sort Mergenthaler, U.
collection PubMed
description Background: Systematic evaluation of psychosocial distress in oncology outpatients is an important issue. We assessed feasibility and benefit of standardized routine screening using the Distress Thermometer (DT) and Problem List (PL) in all patients of our community-based hematooncology group practice. Patients and methods: One thousand four hundred forty-six patients were screened between July 2008 and September 2008. Five hundred randomly selected patients were sent a feedback form. Results: The average distress level was 4.7, with 37% indicating a distress level >5. Patients with nonmalignant diseases (81% autoimmune diseases or hereditary hemochromatosis) showed the highest distress level of 5.2. Most distressed were patients who just learned about relapse or metastases (6.4), patients receiving best supportive care (5.4) and patients receiving adjuvant antihormonal therapy (5.4). Ninety-seven percent of patients appreciated to speak to their doctor about their distress. Fifty-six percent felt better than usual after this consultation. Conclusion: DT and PL are feasible instruments to measure distress in hematooncology outpatients receiving routine care. DT and PL are able to improve doctor–patient communication and thus should be implemented in routine patient care. The study shows that distress is distributed differently between individuals, disease groups and treatment phases.
format Text
id pubmed-3065878
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30658782011-03-30 Evaluation of psychosocial distress in patients treated in a community-based oncology group practice in Germany Mergenthaler, U. Heymanns, J. Köppler, H. Thomalla, J. van Roye, C. Schenk, J. Weide, R. Ann Oncol Original Articles Background: Systematic evaluation of psychosocial distress in oncology outpatients is an important issue. We assessed feasibility and benefit of standardized routine screening using the Distress Thermometer (DT) and Problem List (PL) in all patients of our community-based hematooncology group practice. Patients and methods: One thousand four hundred forty-six patients were screened between July 2008 and September 2008. Five hundred randomly selected patients were sent a feedback form. Results: The average distress level was 4.7, with 37% indicating a distress level >5. Patients with nonmalignant diseases (81% autoimmune diseases or hereditary hemochromatosis) showed the highest distress level of 5.2. Most distressed were patients who just learned about relapse or metastases (6.4), patients receiving best supportive care (5.4) and patients receiving adjuvant antihormonal therapy (5.4). Ninety-seven percent of patients appreciated to speak to their doctor about their distress. Fifty-six percent felt better than usual after this consultation. Conclusion: DT and PL are feasible instruments to measure distress in hematooncology outpatients receiving routine care. DT and PL are able to improve doctor–patient communication and thus should be implemented in routine patient care. The study shows that distress is distributed differently between individuals, disease groups and treatment phases. Oxford University Press 2011-04 2010-10-06 /pmc/articles/PMC3065878/ /pubmed/20926545 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdq455 Text en © The Author 2010. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Mergenthaler, U.
Heymanns, J.
Köppler, H.
Thomalla, J.
van Roye, C.
Schenk, J.
Weide, R.
Evaluation of psychosocial distress in patients treated in a community-based oncology group practice in Germany
title Evaluation of psychosocial distress in patients treated in a community-based oncology group practice in Germany
title_full Evaluation of psychosocial distress in patients treated in a community-based oncology group practice in Germany
title_fullStr Evaluation of psychosocial distress in patients treated in a community-based oncology group practice in Germany
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of psychosocial distress in patients treated in a community-based oncology group practice in Germany
title_short Evaluation of psychosocial distress in patients treated in a community-based oncology group practice in Germany
title_sort evaluation of psychosocial distress in patients treated in a community-based oncology group practice in germany
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3065878/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20926545
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdq455
work_keys_str_mv AT mergenthaleru evaluationofpsychosocialdistressinpatientstreatedinacommunitybasedoncologygrouppracticeingermany
AT heymannsj evaluationofpsychosocialdistressinpatientstreatedinacommunitybasedoncologygrouppracticeingermany
AT kopplerh evaluationofpsychosocialdistressinpatientstreatedinacommunitybasedoncologygrouppracticeingermany
AT thomallaj evaluationofpsychosocialdistressinpatientstreatedinacommunitybasedoncologygrouppracticeingermany
AT vanroyec evaluationofpsychosocialdistressinpatientstreatedinacommunitybasedoncologygrouppracticeingermany
AT schenkj evaluationofpsychosocialdistressinpatientstreatedinacommunitybasedoncologygrouppracticeingermany
AT weider evaluationofpsychosocialdistressinpatientstreatedinacommunitybasedoncologygrouppracticeingermany