From: Expert opinion on detecting and treating depression in palliative care: A Delphi study
Method 0 = not useful, 10 = very useful | Experts' comments |
---|---|
Routine informal asking* Round 2: Median 8.5 (0-10); n = 10 | -It is entirely appropriate to ask patients about their mood as part of a comprehensive symptom assessment |
Two-items (low mood & loss of interest) Round 1: Median 8.0 (4-10); n = 13 Round 2: Median 7.0 (2-9); n = 13 | -Too rigid, it seems the shortest summary of a long screening questionnaire -There is evidence to support this -We are talking about screening, not assessment: if patient presents with a symptom then full assessment, but if screening otherwise mentally well population then this is a useful tool |
Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale Round 1: Median 7.0 (1-10); n = 13 Round 2: Median 7.0 (1-10); n = 13 | -Long to complete for palliative care patients -Have used it in palliative care patients very successfully -I don't find this difficult to use in palliative care in hospice or hospital setting, even for pretty weary patients -Is just a screener for emotional distress, not useful in diagnosing depression -Very useful, very acceptable, very under-rated. For some reason the palliative care community have got it in for the HADS, but I don't think there is any evidence that any other measure is better, and quite a few are a lot worse -Less clear distinction between depression and anxiety |
Single-item "Are you depressed?" Round 1: Median 5.0 (0-10); n = 13 Round 2: Median 7.0 (0-10); n = 12 | -I know the limitations, but in my experience helpful in daily practice -Not really specific -Too direct and one closed question is not enough screening -Chochinov's first paper was based on a false premise. It does sort of work, though, but pretty non-discriminating |
As part of generic symptom assessment (e.g. POS, ESAS) Round 1: Median 7.0 (2-10); n = 13 Round 2: Median 6.5 (1-10); n = 14 | -Good just as first wide screening, utilizes open questions within a conversation about many other symptoms, hence less fear ... less defence in answer, nevertheless not enough for a full screening -These aren't at all bad -Screening by definition has to be simple and quick. Don't confuse screening with severity assessment, there needs to be a 2 stage process: 1) screen; 2) if patient screens positive then use a tool to assess severity |
Brief Edinburgh Depression Scale (BEDS) Round 1: Median 8.0 (2-10); n = 9 Round 2: Median 5.0 (1-9); n = 12 | -Easy to use -The simplified version; but the 6 sentences are too crude for our patients |
Beck's Depression Inventory* Round 2: Median 5.0 (0-8); n = 12 | -Largely about thinking style and content and thus relatively un-skewed by physical problems. A better scale for measuring progress than HADS -Better use only for assessment -After screening, if practitioner is experienced and confident to use, but this is really for specialist psychiatric services |
Prime-MD PHQ-9 Round 1: Median 5.0 (0-10); n = 11 Round 2: Median 3.0 (0-9); n = 11 | -Too complex -Too long -For assessment -It's a diagnostic tool, but it's pretty acceptable and not very difficult to use - It's a severity tool, it is easy to use, primary care practitioners will be familiar with this |
Distress Thermometer (DT) Round 1: Median 6.0 (0-8); n = 9 Round 2: Median 2.0 (0-10); n = 13 | -Distress and depression are different -Useful screen for generalists to decide whether to refer for specialist help -Useful to integrate depression in routine screening of other symptoms, mixed with distress, hence perceived by patients not as psychiatric inquiry. |