> Detailanzeige

Book, Katrin; Marten‐Mittag, Birgitt; Henrich, Gerhard; Dinkel, Andreas; Scheddel, Patrick; Sehlen, Susanne; Haimerl, Wolfgang; Schulte, Thomas; Britzelmeir, Ingrid; Herschbach, Peter

Distress screening in oncology—evaluation of the Questionnaire on Distress in Cancer Patients—short form (QSC‐R10) in a German sample

Literatur-
verwaltung

Zur
Merkliste

Lösche von
Merkliste

Per Whatsapp teilen

Schließen

Merkliste



Sie können Bookmarks mittels Listen verwalten, loggen Sie sich dafür bitte in Ihr SLUB Benutzerkonto ein.
  • Medientyp: E-Artikel
  • Titel: Distress screening in oncology—evaluation of the Questionnaire on Distress in Cancer Patients—short form (QSC‐R10) in a German sample
  • Beteiligte: Book, Katrin; Marten‐Mittag, Birgitt; Henrich, Gerhard; Dinkel, Andreas; Scheddel, Patrick; Sehlen, Susanne; Haimerl, Wolfgang; Schulte, Thomas; Britzelmeir, Ingrid; Herschbach, Peter
  • Erschienen: Wiley, 2011
  • Erschienen in: Psycho-Oncology
  • Sprache: Englisch
  • DOI: 10.1002/pon.1821
  • ISSN: 1057-9249; 1099-1611
  • Schlagwörter: Psychiatry and Mental health ; Oncology ; Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Entstehung:
  • Anmerkungen:
  • Beschreibung: <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p><jats:italic>Objective</jats:italic>: The aim was to examine the psychometric properties of the Questionnaire on Stress in Cancer Patients (QSC‐R10), a 10‐item screening instrument for self‐assessment of psychosocial distress in cancer patients.</jats:p><jats:p><jats:italic>Methods</jats:italic>: A total of 1850 cancer patients were assessed with the QSC‐R10. Patients were recruited from different inpatient and outpatient settings in Germany between 2007 and 2009.</jats:p><jats:p><jats:italic>Results</jats:italic>: Mean age of the sample was 62.9 (SD=12.4) with breast cancer as the most frequent diagnosis (35.2%). The analysis indicated high reliability (Cronbach's <jats:italic>α</jats:italic>=0.85) and test–retest reliability (ICC=0.89). Validation scales included the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Distress–Thermometer (DT), European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ‐C30 (EORTC QLQ‐C30) and Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS). Convergent validity was highest for the HADS total score (<jats:italic>r</jats:italic>=0.74) and the lowest correlation for KPS (<jats:italic>r</jats:italic>=−0.36). The QSC‐R10 significantly distinguished subgroups by their clinical characteristics (metastases, illness duration, previous psychiatric treatment and psycho‐oncological support; <jats:italic>p</jats:italic>&lt;0.001). A cutoff score of &gt;14 demonstrated good sensitivity (81.0%) and specificity (73.2%) and is suitable to determine the need for psychosocial support.</jats:p><jats:p><jats:italic>Conclusion</jats:italic>: The QSC‐R10 is a valid and reliable questionnaire to detect distress in cancer patients with high acceptance among professionals and patients. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</jats:p>