27 research outputs found

    Review of the history and development in the field of psychosocial oncology

    No full text
    Psychosocial oncology is a multi-disciplinary field of practice and, as a recently developed speciality, covers the psychological, social and behavioural dimensions of cancer. We describe the historical background and changing ethos in medical practice in order to understand factors that contributed to the emergence of this new discipline. Modern psychosocial oncology covers a number of topics; the diagnosis and management of psychological morbidity and distress across the cancer continuum from diagnosis through survivorship and, for some patients, terminal illness, the recognition that behaviour and lifestyle contribute to cancer risk and prognosis, the need to include families and carers alongside patients in a comprehensive model of supportive cancer care. Best practice, based on evidence and nationally and internationally accepted guidelines, is being integrated into national cancer plans, and services are briefly described. Future challenges include the need to recognize that the behavioural and mental health sciences have a role to play in comprehensive cancer care and that multi-disciplinary care, which includes psychosocial care, is the best model for ensuring patients needs are comprehensively and adequately met. The return of modern medicine to a more holistic person-focused ethos is needed in order to put the patient back into patient-centred cancer care

    In Reply

    No full text

    The validity of the distress thermometer in prostate cancer populations

    Get PDF
    Background The Distress Thermometer (DT) is widely recommended for screening for distress after cancer. However, the validity of the DT in men with prostate cancer and over differing time points from diagnosis has not been well examined. Method Receiver operating characteristics analyses were used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the DT compared with three commonly used standardised scales in two prospective and one cross-sectional survey of men with prostate cancer (n = 740, 189 and 463, respectively). Comparison scales included the Impact of Event Scale - Revised (IES-R, Study 1), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS, Study 2) and the Brief Symptom Inventory-18 (BSI-18, Study 3). Results Study 1: the DT showed good accuracy against the IES-R at all time points (area under curves (AUCs) ranging from 0.84 to 0.88) and sensitivity was high (>85%). Study 2: the DT performed well against both the anxiety and depression subscales for HADS at baseline (AUC = 0.84 and 0.82, respectively), but sensitivity decreased substantially after 12 months. Study 3: validity was high for the anxiety (AUC = 0.90, sensitivity = 90%) and depression (AUC = 0.85, sensitivity = 74%) subscales of the BSI-18 but was poorer for somatization (AUC = 0.67, sensitivity = 52%). A DT cut-off between ≥3 and ≥6 maximised sensitivity and specificity across analyses. Conclusions The DT is a valid tool to detect cancer-specific distress, anxiety and depression among prostate cancer patients, particularly close to diagnosis. A cut-off of ≥4 may be optimal soon after diagnosis, and for longer-term assessments, ≥3 was supported
    corecore