Prevalence and odds of anxiety and depression in cutaneous malignant melanoma: a proportional meta-analysis and regression.

BACKGROUND: The psychological burden of cutaneous malignant melanoma (CM) is all-encompassing, affecting treatment adherence, recurrence and mortality. However, the prevalence and risk factors of anxiety and depression in CM remain unclear. OBJECTIVES: To establish a benchmark pooled prevalence of anxiety and depression in CM, to provide magnitudes of association for clinical, therapeutic and demographic correlates, and to elucidate temporal trends in anxiety and depression from the time of diagnosis. METHODS: This review followed the MOOSE guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were queried from database inception to 24 August 2023. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two independent authors, utilizing both the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and National Institutes of Health risk-of-bias tools for the latter. The GRADE approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. Prevalence rates, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and prediction intervals (PIs) were derived using a random-effects model and estimating between- and within-study variance. RESULTS: Nine longitudinal and 29 cross-sectional studies were included (7995 patients). Based on the JBI and NIH tools, respectively, quality assessment found 20 and 17 to be at low risk of bias, 12 and 15 to be at moderate risk and 6 and 5 to be at high risk of bias. The prevalence of anxiety [30.6% (95% CI 24.6-37.0; PI 18-47%)] and depression [18.4% (95% CI 13.4-23.9; PI 10-33%)] peaked during treatment, declining to pretreatment levels after 1 year [anxiety: 48% vs. 20% (P = 0.005); depression: 28% vs. 13% (P = 0.03)]. Female sex [odds ratio (OR) 1.8, 95% CI 1.4-2.3; P < 0.001], age < 60 years (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2-2.0; P = 0.002) and low educational level (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2-2.0; P < 0.001) were likely to result in a large increase in the odds of anxiety. Depression was 12.3% higher in those with stage IV vs. those with stage I CM (P = 0.05). Relative to immune checkpoint inhibition, the rates of depression were 22% (P = 0.002) and 34% (P < 0.001) higher among patients with advanced-stage CM receiving interferon-α and chemotherapy, respectively. A significant reduction in self-reported depression scores was demonstrated over time (P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Notably, anxiety and depression in CM affect women, those younger than 60 years of age and the less educated, with up to 80% higher odds of anxiety in these groups. Anxiety and depression surge during chemotherapy and interferon treatment, especially in advanced CM. Our findings facilitate risk stratification and underscore the need for multidisciplinary vigilance.

Melanoma is a serious type of skin cancer that is becoming more prevalent, particularly in people with lighter skin. The UK-based ReconRegen research group conducted a study to understand the psychological impact of melanoma on people, focusing on anxiety and depression. To do this, a systematic review approach was used to analyse data from existing studies and gather a comprehensive perspective. The study discovered that 30% of people with melanoma are affected by anxiety and 18% by depression, significantly higher than the general population. Key risk factors for anxiety included being female, being younger than 60 years of age and having lower educational attainment. Women are 1.8 times more likely to experience anxiety than men, those under 60 years of age are 1.5 times more likely to experience it and individuals with lower educational levels are also 1.5 times more likely to experience anxiety. Findings showed that anxiety and depression levels peaked during treatment phases, especially in people undergoing chemotherapy and immunotherapy. This highlights the need for targeted mental health support during these treatment periods. The findings advocate for mental health considerations in melanoma care, suggesting regular mental health assessments, particularly for high-risk groups and during intense treatment phases. Highlighting the importance of a holistic treatment approach, the study suggests that future research should include long-term studies to understand the chronic impacts of anxiety and depression. Improved clarity and detail in research reporting are essential for developing effective mental health support for people with melanoma, enhancing overall patient care by addressing both physical and emotional health needs.

The Readability of Outpatient Plastic Surgery Clinic Letters: Are We Adhering to Plain English Writing Standards?

The readability of letters sent to patients plays a pivotal role in facilitating joint decision making and positive health outcomes. Guidance suggests that all correspondence should be directed to patients. Covid-19 led to an increase in direct-to-patient communication. This study aims to determine the quantity and quality of plastic surgery clinic letters sent to patients before and during the Covid-19 pandemic. A total of 127 pre-Covid clinic letters from November to December 2019 and 103 peri-Covid clinic letters from April to May 2020 were identified and assessed for readability. Text was analyzed using a standardized set of commonly used readability formulae, including SMOG, Flesch Reading Ease, and the Coleman-Liao Index. A total of 100 pre-Covid and 58 peri-Covid letters were suitable for inclusion. Median results for formulae that output a U.S. grade score ranged between 9 and 12.9 for letters written prior to Covid-19 and 9 and 13.2 for those written during Covid-19. Eight percent of letters were sent to patients pre-Covid, increasing to 28% during the pandemic. Letters sent to patients had a median grade score of between 8 and 12 prior to Covid-19 and 8 and 10.6 during Covid-19. Letters sent to clinicians ranged between 9 and 13 and 9 and 13.3, respectively. Outpatient plastic surgery letters are written at a readability level too high to facilitate understanding among the general population. The increase in direct-to-patient contact during the Covid-19 outbreak has not led to a significant improvement in the readability of clinic letters. The authors suggest an increase in letter standardization and raising awareness of readability when writing clinic letters.