4.7 Article

Fatigue and psychological distress - exploring the relationship in women treated for breast cancer

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 40, 期 11, 页码 1689-1695

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2004.03.021

关键词

depression; fatigue; breast cancer; psychological distress

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Disabling fatigue and psychological symptoms of depression or anxiety are commonly reported by women with treated breast cancer. However, most instruments designed to assess fatigue do not assess concurrent psychological symptoms. This study compared the characteristics of two conceptually different, self-report instruments assessing fatigue to determine the extent to which common psychological symptoms co-exist with the symptom of fatigue in women treated for breast cancer. Women attending an oncology day-care facility for adjuvant treatment of breast cancer or ongoing surveillance post-treatment, completed two self-report questionnaires. The Somatic and Psychological Health REport-34 items (SPHERE) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue (FACT-F subscale-13 items). One hundred and nine women (mean age 52.8 years) completed both questionnaires and total scores on both fatigue assessment scales, FACT-F and SOMA-6, were highly correlated (r = 0.72, P < 0.001). Using the SPHERE case criteria, prolonged fatigue (37% [40/109]) and psychological distress 31% (34/109) were common in women treated for breast cancer. However, those who reported fatigue were much more likely to also report psychological symptoms (22/40 vs. 12/69, chi(2) = 16.7: degrees of freedom (df) = 1; P < 0.001) and the levels of fatigue on the FACT-F were not significantly different between those who reported 'fatigue only' and those who reported 'psychological distress only' (18.8 vs. 17.8, P = 0.79). Thus the recent emphasis on recording fatigue during and following treatments for cancer needs to be accompanied by concurrent measurement of psychological symptoms. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据