Search

Purpose: Depression is highly prevalent in advanced cancer patients, but the diagnosis of depressive disorder in patients with advanced cancer is difficult. Screening instruments could facilitate diagnosing depressive disorder in patients with advanced cancer. The aim of this study was to determine the validity of the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) and a single screening question as screening tools for depressive disorder in advanced cancer patients. Methods: Patients with advanced metastatic disease, visiting the outpatient palliative care department, were asked to fill out a self-questionnaire containing the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) and a single screening question 'Are you feeling depressed?' The mood section of the PRIME-MD was used as a gold standard. Results: Sixty-one patients with advanced metastatic disease were eligible to be included in the study. Complete data were obtained from 46 patients. The area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristics analysis of the BDI-II was 0.82. The optimal cut-off point of the BDI-II was 16 with a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 69%. The single screening question showed a sensitivity of 50% and a specificity of 94%. Conclusions: The BDI-II seems an adequate screening tool for a depressive disorder in advanced cancer patients. The sensitivity of a single screening question is poor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Quality indicators (QIs) for the organization of palliative care (PC) can contribute to quality improvement as they assess the key elements for adequate organization of care. They might differ between health care organization, cultures and economic resources. The aim of this study was face-validate an Indonesian set of QIs based on a European set, to compare the two sets of QIs and to test the applicability of Indonesian set. Methods: A modified two-round RAND Delphi process was conducted in Indonesia. Twenty-four health care professionals from different disciplines were invited as panellists to rate clarity and usefulness of 98 QIs. Next, a applicability pilot test took place in five hospitals. Results: A total of 21 panellists considered 76 QIs (78 %) face-valid and added two new ones. Of the QIs with the highest ratings, eight were evaluated by head nurses and two by reviewing 50 patient records. Each QI was met by at least two hospitals, and only one by all five. Regarding the two QIs on structured clinical record keeping, most medical records contained multidimensional aspects of care. Conclusions: We found that most QIs for the organization of PC developed for European countries were also considered face-valid for Indonesian hospitals. The top 10 QIs were applicable in Indonesia. This suggests that most of the organizational QIs are universal rather than country specific. The Indonesian set of QIs should be considered as a first step in developing, testing, and implementing a set of QIs for PC in Indonesia. We recommend validation in other Asian regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]