Validation of the Distress Thermometer and Problem List in Patients with Recurrent Respiratory Papillomatosis

• Published in: Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery Vol. 156; no. 1; pp. 180 - 188
• Main Authors: San Giorgi, Michel R. M., Aaltonen, Leena-Maija, Rihkanen, Heikki, Tjon Pian Gi, Robin E. A., van der Laan, Bernard F. A. M., Hoekstra-Weebers, Josette E. H. M., Dikkers, Frederik G.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01-01-2017
• Subjects: Adult; Cross-Sectional Studies; distress; Female; Finland; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Netherlands; Papillomavirus Infections - psychology; Prospective Studies; Psychometrics; recurrent respiratory papillomatosis; Respiratory Tract Infections - psychology; screening; Sensitivity and Specificity; Socioeconomic Factors; Stress, Psychological - diagnosis; Stress, Psychological - etiology; Surveys and Questionnaires; distress; screening; recurrent respiratory papillomatosis
• ISSN: 0194-5998; 1097-6817
• DOI: 10.1177/0194599816668307

Objective
There is no specific clinical tool for physicians to detect psychosocial and physical distress or health care need in patients with recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (RRP). The main aim of this study is to validate the RRP-adapted Distress Thermometer and Problem List (DT&PL).
Study Design
Prospective cross-sectional questionnaire research.
Setting
Academic tertiary care medical centers in Groningen, Netherlands, and Helsinki, Finland.
Subjects and Methods
Ninety-one juvenile- and adult-onset RRP patients participated from the departments of otorhinolaryngology–head and neck surgery of the University Medical Center Groningen, Netherlands, and Helsinki University Hospital, Finland. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale was used as the gold standard.
Results
A DT cutoff score ≥4 gave the best sensitivity and specificity. Thirty-one percent of patients had significant distress according to the DT cutoff. Significantly more patients with a score above than under the cutoff had a referral wish. The PL appeared to be reliable. Patients’ opinions on the DT&PL were largely favorable.
Conclusion
The Dutch and Finnish versions of the DT&PL are valid, reliable screening tools for distress in RRP patients.