Correlates of distress for cancer patients: Results from multi-institution use of holistic patient-reported screening tool.
2019; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Volume: 37; Issue: 15_suppl Linguagem: Inglês
10.1200/jco.2019.37.15_suppl.11587
ISSN1527-7755
AutoresChristine B. Weldon, James Gerhart, Frank J. Penedo, Paramjeet Khosla, Betty Roggenkamp, Mary Pasquinelli, Joanna Martin, Teresa Lillis, Shelly S. Lo, Lawrence E. Feldman, Catherine Deamant, Rosa Berardi, Harry Miranda, Carol Newsom, Anne Bowman, Julia R. Trosman,
Tópico(s)Clinical practice guidelines implementation
Resumo11587 Background: The Commission on Cancer (CoC) Standard 3.2 requires distress screening and indicated action for cancer patients. NCCN and ASCO supportive care and age-related guidelines include patient reported concerns beyond distress. This study compares PHQ4 scores to other patient reported concerns. Methods: The Coleman Supportive Oncology Collaborative aggregated “best of” screening tools to assess patient reported needs and concerns aligned with CoC, NCCN and ASCO guidance. This supportive care screening tool was implemented at 8 sites from July 2015 thru July 2018. Analysis used chi squared test. Results: Most patients, 86% (10,635/12,295), reported one plus concerns and/or above threshold scores on PHQ4, PROMIS Pain, Fatigue or Physical Function. A chi squared comparison of patients with at least mild distress on PHQ4 to patients with no distress resulted in p values < .0001 for every screening category. Conclusions: Patients with a PHQ4 distress score of mild, moderate or severe also reported statistically significant levels of practical, family, physical, nutrition and treatment concerns. These patients also scored threshold levels for PROMIS Pain, Fatigue, and Physical Function. Screening only for distress without screening for other patient concerns may direct patients to services that do not address or focus on the underlying cause of the distress. [Table: see text]
Referência(s)