Yes / Previous studies have found high levels of undetected psychological distress and unaddressed need among care home residents. The aim of this study was to investigate the usability and usefulness of the Distress Thermometer for the Elderly (DTE; modified from a measure used in cancer care) in the identification of distress and need with older people in care homes. Method: This was a single group, cross-sectional study. Staff in 12 nursing homes and one care home in England completed the DTE and a measure of depression with their older residents (n = 66). Quantitative methods were employed to investigate the relationship between the Distress Thermometer rating, depression scores and problems or needs selected on the DTE. Results: The DTE was found to be feasible for completion by residents with assistance from staff. The level of distress on the DTE was significantly related to depression, number of problems and practical–physical problems. Each of 50 problems in the checklist was checked by at least one of the respondents. More problem items and physical–practical problems were selected by individuals who reached clinical levels of depression. Conclusions: In this preliminary study, results indicate promising potential for the use of the DTE as a simple screening tool for distress, as well as to enable residents to record their perceived needs as part of care-planning and a broader person-centred approach.

Aims and Methods The overall aim was to evaluate methods of screening and assessment of distress, anxiety, and depression in cancer patients. Further, to evaluate effects of a psychosocial intervention and to explore changes of distress, anxiety, depression, and HRQoL during six months. Study I included 495 consecutive patients screened with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) at their first visit to an Oncology Department. Half of the patients with >7 on any of HADS subscales received standard care (SCG), and half received a psychosocial intervention (IG). To compare HADS with a thorough clinical assessment (CA), Study II included 171 identified patients representing both sexes, <65/≥65 years, and curative/palliative treatment intention. Results Screening with HADS identified anxiety or/and depression symptoms in 36% of the 495 patients. Thirty-six (43%) of 84 IG patients attended CA, resulting in support for 20 (24%) of them. There were no differences between SC and IG during follow-up, anxiety and depression decreased and HRQoL increased, although anxiety was still present and HRQoL impaired at six months. The Distress Thermometer (DT) ≥4 (sensitivity 87%, specificity 73%) is valid for screening of distress; its ability to measure changes over time is comparable to HADS. Of 319 patients screened with <8 on both HADS subscales, 196 (80%) were stable non-cases with HRQoL comparable to that of the general population and 49 (20%) patients were unstable non-cases, with deteriorated anxiety, depression, and HRQoL. >4 on HADS subscales may be useful for early detection of unstable non-cases. In Study II, HADS identified 49 (34%) and the CA 71 (49%) patients as having distress, anxiety or depression. CA identified more men and more young patients with distress than HADS did. Conclusion Screening and assessment identifies patients with persistent symptoms and increases access to CA and support. The DT may be used routinely in oncology care. When HADS is used, healthcare professionals should be aware of psychosocial problems perceived by patients but not covered by HADS. Most patients identified with distress seem to have resources to manage problems without needing additional support. Patients screened as non-cases indicate no need for re-assessment.

Objectives: The Distress Thermometer (DT) is a validated and widely used screening tool to identify clinically relevant distress in cancer patients. It is unclear, to which extend subjectively perceived distress measured by the DT is related to objective burden (mental disorder). We therefore examine the co-occurrence of a mental disorder for different DT thresholds and explore the diagnostic properties of the DT in detecting a mental disorder. Methods: In this multicenter cross-sectional study, we included 4,020 patients with mixed cancer diagnoses. After selection of relevant cases, weighting procedure and imputation of missing data we evaluated the data of N = 3,212 patients. We used the DT to assess perceived distress and the standardized Composite International Diagnostic Interview for Oncology (CIDI-O) to assess the 4-week prevalence of mental disorders. The association between distress and any mental disorder (MD) is calculated using Pearson correlations. Relative risks for MD in patients with/without distress and the co-occurrence of distress and MD were calculated with Poisson regression. To assess the operating characteristics between distress and MD, we present the area under the curve (AUC). Results: 22.9% of the participants had a cut-off DT level of 5 and were affected by MD. Each level of distress co-occurs with MD. The proportion of patients diagnosed with MD was not greater than the proportion of patients without MD until distress levels of DT = 6 were reached. The correlation between DT and MD was r = 0.27. The ROCanalysis shows the area under curve (AUC) = 0.67, which is classified as unsatisfactory. With increasing distress severity, patients are not more likely to have a mental disorder. Conclusion: Our results suggests viewing and treating cancer-related distress as a relatively distinct psychological entity. Cancer-related distress may be associated with an increased risk for a mental disorder and vice versa, but the overlap of both concepts is very moderate.