ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: The hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS) has been widely used on cancer patients as an indicator of psychological morbidity. Though the scale has been used in India, no reports are available on translation of HADS in any Indian language and testing the reliability. The present study describes the translation process of HADS into Malayalam and testing its reliability and validity on psychological morbidity in cancer patients. METHODS: The English version of the HADS was translated into Malayalam and was used in this study. The questionnaire was administered to 240 cancer patients and statistical analysis was carried out using Chronbach's alpha to test the internal consistency of the HADS scale while confirmatory factor analysis was carried out using principal axis factoring with equimax rotation and Kaiser Normalization to test its construct validity. RESULTS: The Cronbach's alpha was found to be 0.81 for the HADS anxiety subscale, 0.71 for the HADS depression subscale, and 0.85 for HADS tool. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated two depression items (i.e., enjoyment and anhedonia) loading onto the anxiety subscale. Clinical caseness for anxiety was observed in 8 per cent, while 11 per cent of the patients had borderline mood disorder. Clinical caseness for depression was identified in 7.6 and 13 per cent of patients were found to have borderline mood disturbances. INTERPRETATION & CONCLUSION: This preliminary validation study of the Malayalam version of the HADS showed it as an acceptable, and reliable measure of psychological morbidity among cancer patients. The prevalence of anxiety and depression in Indian population was low and enjoyment and anhedonia might present as anxiety initially.
Subject(s)
Anxiety/diagnosis , Depression/diagnosis , Factor Analysis, Statistical , Hospitalization , Humans , India , Neoplasms/psychology , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Surveys and Questionnaires , Reproducibility of ResultsABSTRACT
CONTEXT: Advances in cancer treatment have led to cure and prolongation of patients' lives; however associated psychosocial problems, including distress, can detrimentally affect patients' compliance with treatment and ultimately, their outcome. Symptom distress has been well addressed in many studies; however, psychological distress has only been quantified by using depression or anxiety scales/checklists or quality of life scales containing a distress sub scale/component or by the use of scales that are not psychological distress-specific. AIMS: The present study is an attempt to construct a psychological distress inventory for specific use with cancer patients. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: The standardisation sample consisted of 63 randomly selected patients with head and neck cancer who had undergone/ were undergoing curative treatment at the Regional Cancer Centre, Trivandrum. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Distress Inventory for Cancer contained 57 positively and negatively toned items. An item analysis was conducted, followed by a factor analysis, thereby identifying the domains influencing distress. RESULTS: The final questionnaire contained 26 items subdivided into four domains viz. the personal, spiritual, physical, and the family domains, with each domain providing a sub score. The reliability coefficient (Cronbach's alpha) of the scale was found to be 0.85. CONCLUSIONS: These are the preliminary results of an ongoing study on global distress and tool development process. Reported here is the first step towards development of such tool.
Subject(s)
Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Factor Analysis, Statistical , Female , Head and Neck Neoplasms/psychology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Quality of Life , Surveys and Questionnaires , Self-Assessment , Stress, Psychological/diagnosisABSTRACT
With the developments in cancer treatment, more and more patients are surviving their disease. However, very little emphasis is being placed to rehabilitate these cancer survivors. Ignorance, social structure, stigma attached in seeking psychological help, and poor communication skills of oncology staff all contribute to poor rehabilitative efforts. The priority of governmental agencies and health efforts to fight rampant communicable diseases, malnutrition, maternal health, and the frequent natural calamities, puts rehabilitation movements in the back seat. Treatment and prevention of disability and its rehabilitation requires comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach. There is an urgent need to promote physical and psychological rehabilitation.