The Demoralization Interview: Reliability and validity of a new brief diagnostic measure among medically ill patients.

BACKGROUND: Demoralization is a state of low morale and poor coping that is being increasingly recognized in stressful circumstances, such as illness. Meta-analyses show prevalence of 30% in the medically and 50% in the mentally ill. A brief structured diagnostic interview is needed to assess for and diagnose demoralization. METHODS: The Demoralization Interview (DI) was designed from items of the Demoralization Scale-II (DS-II) and common items used in other clinical interviews. The resultant 26 items were administered to 264 patients with serious progressive medical illnesses, together with the DS-II, measures of depression, anxiety, and quality of life. Rasch analysis was used to co-calibrate the DI against the DS-II. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) were assessed. Concurrent validation was conducted against measures of anxiety, depression, and quality of life. RESULTS: A 14-item Demoralization Interview (DI) with a diagnostic threshold of 6 symptoms generated sensitivity of 78.0%, specificity of 90.9%, and AUROC of 0.84 against the DS-II. Unidimensionality was indicated, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.81. For respondents with 6 or more symptoms on the DI, 98% recognized a current stressor and 66% described significant distress or functional impairment. Demoralized respondents carried significantly lower quality of life, higher physical disability, and higher depressive and anxiety symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The DI has good reliability and validity, with a threshold of 6 symptoms supporting a diagnosis of demoralization. It could be used as a stand-alone diagnosis, or as a specifier for adjustment disorder or depression.

Psycho-Existential Symptom Assessment Scale (PeSAS) Screening in Palliative Care.

CONTEXT: Psycho-existential symptoms are common yet often missed or neglected in palliative care. Screening can be an effective way to recognize and respond to this need. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to implement routine use of the Psycho-existential Symptom Assessment Scale (PeSAS) as a screening tool in Australian palliative care services and discern the symptom prevalence identified. METHODS: In a multi-site rolling design, we established implementation site committees and embarked on experiential workshops to train clinicians in the tool's efficient use. Patient symptom prevalence data were collected to compare uptake across sites. Descriptive statistics were applied. RESULTS: Over one year, we trained 216 clinicians across six palliative care services in the use of the PeSAS as a screening tool and collected data from 1405 patients. Clinicians reported significant growth in their sense of efficacy in assessing psycho-existential wellness. Services using electronic records implemented most easily. Psycho-existential symptoms with clinically significant prevalence (scores ≥ 4/10) included anxiety 41.1%, discouragement 37.6%, hopelessness 35.8%, pointlessness 26.9%, depression 30.3%, and the wish to die 17%. The precision of measurement within 3% was found for severe ratings (score ≥ 8/10) including anxiety 10.6%, depression 10.2%, the wish to die 7.6%, and confusion 3.6%. CONCLUSION: Clinicians can be trained to screen with the Psycho-existential Symptom Assessment Scale, which serves as a valuable measure to better recognize symptoms of psycho-existential distress among palliative care patients. Implementation barriers included the prior ethos of the service, confidence in talking about these themes, electronic data entry, and perceived time pressures.