Feasibility and usefulness of the ‘Distress Screening Program in Ambulatory Care’ in clinical oncology practice
Abstract
Objective: Although the implementation of routine screening for distress is desirable, doing so is difficult in today's busy clinical oncology practice. We developed the ‘Distress Screening Program in Ambulatory Care’ (DISPAC program) as a practical means of screening for and facilitating the treatment of major depression and adjustment disorders in cancer patients. This study assessed the feasibility and usefulness of the DISPAC program in actual clinical situations. Methods: As part of the DISPAC program, nurses administered a psychological screening measure, the Distress and Impact Thermometer (DIT), to consecutive cancer patients visiting an outpatient clinic in the waiting room. The attending physician then recommended psycho‐oncology service referral to all positively screened patients. We compared the proportion of patients referred to a psycho‐oncology service during the DISPAC period with the usual care period. Results: Of the targeted 491 patients treated during the DISPAC period, 91.9% (451/491) completed the DIT; the results were positive in 37.0% (167/451), recommendations for referrals were given to 93.4% (156/167), and 25.0% (39/156) accepted the referral. Ultimately 5.3% (26/491) of the targeted patients were treated by psycho‐oncology service as having major depression or adjustment disorders, a significantly higher proportion than during the usual care period (0.3%; p<0.001). The nurses required 132±58 s per person to administer the DIT. Conclusions: The DISPAC program is useful for facilitating the care of cancer patients with psychological distress. Nevertheless, the acceptance of referrals by patients and the reduction of the burden placed on nurses are areas requiring improvement. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Facilitators and barriers to the use of other formats such as group or internet-based therapies may differ considerably from those that relate to accepting the more personalised individual intervention formats of telephone or face-to-face.
“Facilitators and barriers to the use of other formats such as group or internet-based therapies may differ considerably from those that relate to accepting the more personalised individual intervention formats of telephone or face-to-face [48]”
From Psychological intervention targeting distress for cancer patients: a meta-analytic study investigating uptake and adherence. (2016) · cites this paper as [48]
Cites
Psychiatric morbidity and its recognition by doctors in patients with cancer
Fallowfield, L., Ratcliffe, D., Jenkins, V, & Saul, J. (2001) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1054/bjoc.2001.1724 · Cited by 694 · see citing works
Tuinman, M. A., Gazendam‐Donofrio, S. M., & Hoekstra‐Weebers, J. E. (2008) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.23622 · Cited by 404 · see citing works
Söllner, W., Maislinger, S., König, A., DeVries, A., & Lukas, P. (2004) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.867 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Curry, C., Cossich, T., Matthews, J., Beresford, J., & McLachlan, S. (2002) · Supportive Care in Cancer · doi:10.1007/s00520-002-0371-2 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Usefulness of the nurse‐assisted screening and psychiatric referral program
Shimizu, K., Akechi, T., Okamura, M., Oba, A., Fujimori, M., Akizuki, N., & Uchitomi, Y. (2005) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.20992 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Screening for Distress and Unmet Needs in Patients With Cancer: Review and Recommendations
Carlson, L. E., Waller, A., & Mitchell, A. J. (2012) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2011.39.5509 · Cited by 550 · see citing works
Brebach, R., Sharpe, L., Costa, D. S. J., Rhodes, P., & Butow, P. (2016) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.4099 · Cited by 139 · see citing works
Bauwens, S., Baillon, C., Distelmans, W., & Theuns, P. (2014) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.3484 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
van Scheppingen, C., Schroevers, M. J., Pool, G., Smink, A., Mul, V. E., Coyne, J. C., & Sanderman, R. (2014) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.3447 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
- Authors
- Shimizu, K., Ishibashi, Y., Umezawa, S., Izumi, H., Akizuki, N., Ogawa, A., Fujiwara, Y., Ando, M., Katsumata, N., Tamura, K., Kouno, T., Shimizu, C., Yonemori, K., Yunokawa, M., & Uchitomi, Y.
- Affiliations
- National Cancer Center Hospital East (JP)
- National Cancer Center Hospital (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Uchitomi, Yosuke
- ORCID
- Venue
- Psycho-Oncology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-06-27
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 718-725
- ISSN
- 1057-9249 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1611
- OpenAlex
- W2069079317
- Cited by
- 70
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 3.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psycho-Oncology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (22790580)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Family Support in Illness
- Keywords
- psychological distress screening, cancer patients, major depressive disorder, adjustment disorder, referral acceptance, screening feasibility
- MeSH terms
- Adjustment Disorders, Adult, Aged, Ambulatory Care, Breast Neoplasms, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Feasibility Studies, Female, Genital Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Male, Mass Screening, Neoplasm Staging, Neoplasms, Unknown Primary, Surveys and Questionnaires, Referral and Consultation, Sick Role, Patient Satisfaction, Needs Assessment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review