Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Distress screening remains important during follow-up after primary breast cancer treatment

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

To improve psychosocial care, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommends the use of the Distress Thermometer (DT) to detect distress among cancer patients.

Objectives

The objectives of this study were to describe the prevalence of distress in breast cancer survivors (BCSs) and to investigate demographic, treatment, and psychosocial variables associated with distress and problems most often reported on the problem list. Moreover, we assessed how many BCSs requested referral to a professional for additional support.

Methods

In a cross-sectional study, 258 BCSs identified at an outpatient clinic of a university hospital were asked to complete the following questionnaires: DT, Quality of Life Questionnaire, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and Illness Cognition Questionnaire.

Results

Of the 258 identified BCSs, 129 (50 %) completed all questionnaires. After a mean follow-up period of 5.6 (SD, 10) years, 47 (36 %) of these 129 BCSs experienced distress as assessed by the DT. BCSs experienced significantly more distress in the first 2 years than in the period between 2 and 5 years after surgery. Also, more distress was experienced in BCSs treated with surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy compared to those treated with surgery only. Problems most frequently encountered were fatigue (57 %), decrease in muscle strength (47 %), and lack of physical fitness (42 %). Thirty one (69 %) of the distressed BCSs requested or considered referral to a professional. Regression analysis showed that reduced quality of life, reduced cognitive function, and fatigue were predictors of distress.

Conclusion

The current study found that more than one third of all BCSs experienced distress. Screening remains an important part of BCSs' care. The professional should be aware of the potential problems and distress patients may experience.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM (2010) Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer 127:2893–2917

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Dutch Cancer Society (2011) Cancer in the Netherlands until 2020. Dutch Cancer Society, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  3. Montazeri A (2008) Health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients: a bibliographic review of the literature from 1974 to 2007. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 27:32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Peuckmann V, Ekholm O, Rasmussen NK et al (2009) Chronic pain and other sequelae in long-term breast cancer survivors: nationwide survey in Denmark. Eur J Pain 13(5):478–485

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Servaes P, Verhagen S, Bleijenberg G (2002) Determinants of chronic fatigue in disease-free breast cancer patients: a cross-sectional study. Ann Oncol 13(4):589–598

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ganz PA, Desmond KA, Leedham B, Rowland JH, Meyerowitz BE, Belin TR (2002) Quality of life in long-term, disease-free survivors of breast cancer: a follow-up study. Natl Cancer Inst 2 94(1):39–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Costanzo ES, Lutgendorf SK, Mattes ML et al (2007) Adjusting to life after treatment: distress and quality of life following treatment for breast cancer. Br J Cancer 97(12):1625–1631

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Garofalo JP, Choppala S, Hamann HA, Gjerde J (2009) Uncertainty during the transition from cancer patient to survivor. Cancer Nurs 32(4):E8–E14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Stanton AL (2012) What happens now? Psychosocial care for cancer survivors after medical treatment completion. J Clin Oncol 30(11):1215–1220

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lavigne JE, Griggs JJ, Tu XM, Lerner DJ (2008) Hot flashes, fatigue, treatment exposures and work productivity in breast cancer survivors. J Cancer Surviv 2(4):296–302

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hansen JA, Feuerstein M, Calvio LC, Olsen CH (2008) Breast cancer survivors at work. J Occup Environ Med 50(7):777–784

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (2011) NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: distress management. US.

  13. Lazarus R, Folkman S (1984) Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  14. Vitek L, Rosenzweig MQ, Stollings S (2007) Distress in patients with cancer: definition, assessment, and suggested interventions. Clin J Oncol Nurs 11(3):413–418

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ryan H, Schofield P, Cockburn J et al (2005) How to recognize and manage psychological distress in cancer patients. Eur J Cancer Care 14(1):7–15

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Falagas M, Zarkadoulia E, Ioannidou E, Peppas G, Christodoulou C, Rafailidis P (2007) The effect of psychosocial factors on breast cancer outcome: a systematic review. Breast Cancer Research 9:4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Burgess C, Cornelius V, Love S, Graham J, Richards M, Ramirez A (2005) Depression and anxiety in women with early breast cancer: five year observational cohort study. BMJ 330(7493):702

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Evers AWM, Kraaimaat FW, van Lankveld W, Jongen PJH, Jacobs JWG, Bijlsma JWJ (2001) Beyond unfavorable thinking: the illness cognition questionnaire for chronic diseases. J Consult Clin Psychol 69:1026–1036

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Stanton AL, Ganz PA, Rowland JH, Meyerowitz BE, Krupnick JL, Sears SR (2005) Promoting adjustment after treatment for cancer. Cancer 104(11):2608–2613

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Holland JC, Reznik I (2005) Pathways for psychosocial care of cancer survivors. Cancer suppl 104(11)

  21. Henselmans I, Helgeson VS, Seltman H, de Vries J, Sanderman R, Ranchor AV (2010) Identification and prediction of distress trajectories in the first year after a breast cancer diagnosis. Health Psychol 29(2):160–168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Helgeson VS, Snyder P, Seltman H (2004) Psychological and physical adjustment to breast cancer over 4 years: identifying distinct trajectories of change. Health Psychol 2004 23(1):3–15

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hinnen C, Ranchor AV, Sanderman R, Snijders TAB, Hagedoorn M, Coyne JC (2008) Course of distress in breast cancer patients, their partners, and matched control couples. Ann Behav Med 36(2):141–148

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bauwens S, Baillon C, Distelmans W, Theuns P (2009) The ‘Distress Barometer’: validation of method of combining the distress thermometer with a rated complaint scale. Psycho-Oncology 18(5):534–542

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Tuinman MA, Gazendam-Donofrio SM, Hoekstra-Weebers JE (2008) Screening and referral for psychosocial distress in oncologic practice: use of the distress thermometer. Cancer 113(4):870–878

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gessler S, Low J, Daniells E, Williams R, Brough V, Tookman A, Jones L (2008) Screening for distress in cancer patients: is the distress thermometer a valid measure in the UK and does it measure change over time? A prospective validation study. Psycho-Oncology 17(6):538–547

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Ransom S, Jacobsen PB, Booth-Jones M (2006) Validation of the distress thermometer with bone marrow transplant patients. Psycho-Oncology 15(7):604–612

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Jacobsen PB, Donovan KA, Trask PC et al (2005) Screening for psychologic distress in ambulatory cancer patients. Cancer 103(7):1494–1502

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Hoffman BM, Zevon MA, D'Arrigo MC, Cecchini TB (2004) Screening for distress in cancer patients: the NCCN rapid-screening measure. Psycho-Oncology 13(11):792–799

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Gil F, Grassi L, Travado L, Tomamichel M, Gonzalez JR (2005) Use of distress and depression thermometers to measure psychosocial morbidity among southern European cancer patients. Support Care Cancer 13(8):600–606

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Dutch Association of Comprehensive Cancer Centers (2010) Guideline: detection of need for psychosocial care, the Netherlands.

  32. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP (1983) The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 67(6):361–370

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Bjelland I, Dahl AA, Haug TT, Neckelmann D (2002) The validity of the hospital anxiety and depression scale. An updated literature review. J Psychosom Res 52(2):69–77

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Spinhoven P, Ormel J, Sloekers PP, Kempen GI, Speckens AE, Van Hemert AM (1997) A validation study of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) in different groups of Dutch subjects. Psychol Med 27(2):363–370

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Aaronson N, Ahmedzai A, Bergman B et al (1993) The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30. Journal Natl Cancer Inst 85(5):365–376

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Osoba D, Aaronson N, Zee B, Sprangers M, te Velde A (1997) Modification of the EORTC QLQ-C30 (version 2.0) based on content validity and reliability testing in large samples of patients with cancer. The Study Group on Quality of Life of the EORTC and the Symptom Control and Quality of Life Committees of the NCI of Canada Clinical Trials Group. Qual Life Res 6(2):103–108

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Sprangers MA, Groenvold M, Arraras JI et al (1996) The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaire module: first results from a three-country field study. J Clin Oncol 14(10):2756–2768

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Greimel E, Bottomley A, Cull A et al (2003) An international field study of the reliability and validity of a disease-specific questionnaire module (the QLQ-OV28) in assessing the quality of life of patients with ovarian cancer. Eur J Cancer 39(10):1402–1408

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Evers A, Kraaimaat F, Wv L, Jacobs W, Bijlsma J (1998) De ziekte-cognitie-lijst (ZCL). Gedragstherapie 31:205–220

    Google Scholar 

  40. NABON (2012) National Breast Cancer Guideline version 2.0. Consensus based 2012-02-13. http://www.oncoline.nl/mammacarcinoom. Accessed 28 November 2012

  41. Phipps AI, Ichikawa L, Bowles EJ et al (2010) Defining menopausal status in epidemiologic studies: a comparison of multiple approaches and their effects on breast cancer rates. Maturitas 67(1):60–66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Tabuchnink BG, Fidell LS (2007) Using multivariate analysis, 5th edn. Pearson Education, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  43. Bower JE, Ganz PA, Desmond KA et al (2006) Fatigue in long-term breast carcinoma survivors: a longitudinal investigation. Cancer 106(4):751–758

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Norton S, Cosco T, Doyle F, Done J,Sacker A (2013) The hospital anxiety and depression scale: a meta confirmatory factor analysis. J Psychosom Res 74(1):74–81

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This study was performed by two researchers (FKPvA and SWvdB) funded by Pink Ribbon, The Netherlands.

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, P.O. box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Floortje K. Ploos van Amstel & Petronella B. Ottevanger

  2. Department of Medical Psychology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, P.O. box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Sanne W. van den Berg, Marieke F. M. Gielissen & Judith B. Prins

  3. Department of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Hanneke W. M. van Laarhoven

Authors
  1. Floortje K. Ploos van Amstel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sanne W. van den Berg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hanneke W. M. van Laarhoven
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marieke F. M. Gielissen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Judith B. Prins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Petronella B. Ottevanger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Floortje K. Ploos van Amstel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ploos van Amstel, F.K., van den Berg, S.W., van Laarhoven, H.W.M. et al. Distress screening remains important during follow-up after primary breast cancer treatment. Support Care Cancer 21, 2107–2115 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-013-1764-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-013-1764-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation