Download - IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)
![Page 1: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Alex Mitchell [email protected] Royal Infirmary UK
IPOS2009 – Talks 27:1
How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer?A Meta-analysis against Robust Psychiatric Interviews
IPOS2009 – Talks 27:1
How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer?A Meta-analysis against Robust Psychiatric Interviews
Individual Lecture 2; 24 June 2009: 3.30pm-4.30pm; Session 27 Lecture Nr.1
![Page 2: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
BackgroundBackground
![Page 3: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
1,2 or 3 Simple QQ15%
Clinical Skills Alone73%
ICD10/DSMIV0%
Short QQ3%
Other/Uncertain9%
Methods to Evaluate Depression
Unassisted Clinician Conventional Scales
Verbal Questions Visual-Analogue Test
PHQ2
WHO-5
Whooley/NICE
Distress Thermometer
Depression Thermometer
Ultra-Short (<5)Short (5-10) Long (10+)Untrained Trained
1,2 or 3 Simple QQ15%
Clinical Skills Alone73%
ICD10/DSMIV0%
Short QQ3%
Other/Uncertain9%
1,2 or 3 Simple QQ15%
Clinical Skills Alone73%
ICD10/DSMIV0%
Short QQ3%
Other/Uncertain9%
=> Table scales
![Page 4: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
![Page 5: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
=> accuracy
[handout 3]
![Page 6: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
![Page 7: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
HADs LimitationsHADs Limitations
![Page 8: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
HADS Validity vs Structured InterviewHADS Validity vs Structured Interview
METHODS Against depression
9x studies of the HADS-D5x of the HADS-T2x of the HADS-A were identified.
Studies reported results at almost all possible cut-points with little consistency of approach. Only 8 authors used an ROC curve to calculate an optimal cut-point.
![Page 9: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Results vs Affective DisorderResults vs Affective DisorderAgainst affective disorders, there appeared to be
advantage for the HADS-D and a relatively poor performance for the HADS-A. The HADS-T occupied an intermediate position. The clinical utility index (UI+, UI-) was 0.364 and 0.724 for the HADS-D.
Sensitivity Specificity PPV NPV Fraction Correct
HADS-D 60.3% 85.1% 60.3% 85.1% 78.3%
HADS-A 51.2% 77.9% 65.4% 66.2% 65.9%
HADS-T 53.3% 81.6% 59.6% 77.5% 72.6%
![Page 10: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
HADS Validity vs DepressionHADS Validity vs DepressionRESULTSHADS-T = HADS-D = HADS-A
The clinical utility index (UI+, UI-) was 0.214 and 0.789 for the HADS-D
Sensitivity Specificity PPV NPV FCHADS-D 51.4% 86.9% 41.6% 90.8% 81.4% HADS-A 82.4% 81.7% 35.9% 97.4% 81.8%
HADS-T 77.7% 84.3% 44.5% 95.9% 83.4%
![Page 11: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Pre-test Probability
Pos
t-tes
t Pro
babi
lity
HADS-T Positive (N=5)HADS-T Negative (N=5)Baseline ProbabilityHADS-A Positive (N=2)HADS-A Negative (N=2)HADS-D Positive (N=9)HADS-D Negative (N=9)
![Page 12: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
HADs ValidityHADs Validity
![Page 13: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
HADS vs ClinicianHADS vs Clinician
![Page 14: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Pre-test Probability
Pos
t-tes
t Pro
babi
lity
Clinician Positive (Fallowfield et al, 2001)
Clinician Negative (Fallowfield et al, 2001)
Baseline Probability
HADS-D Positive (Mata-analysis)
HADS-D Negative (Meta-analysis)
![Page 15: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
HADS vs Other ScalesHADS vs Other Scales96 studies13 tools
![Page 16: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Pre-test Probability
Post
-test
Pro
babi
lity
HADS+ HADS- Baseline ProbabilityGDS30+ GDS30- GDS15+GHQ28+ HDRS+ ZUNG+GDS15- GHQ28- HDRS-ZUNG- PHQ9+ PHQ9-WHOOLEY2Q+ WHOOLEY2Q- BDI+BDI- BDI-SF+ BDI-SF-CESD+ CESD- 1Q+1Q- GHQ12+ GHQ12-
![Page 17: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Poster session 3 (25 June 2009) Poster category 7 (Methods and Measurements) Poster Nr. 20
![Page 18: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
![Page 19: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
![Page 20: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
DistressThermometer
AnxietyThermometer
DepressionThermometer
AngerThermometer
TenNineEightSevenSixFiveFourThreeTwoOneZero
![Page 21: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
ET vs DT (n=130)ET vs DT (n=130)Of 63% DT low scorers
51% recorded emotional difficulties on the new Emotion Thermometers (ET) tool
Out of those with any emotional complication
93.3% would be recognised using the AnxT alonevs 54.4% who would be recognised using the DT alone.
[handout 9]
![Page 22: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
DT DepTVsHADS-A
AnxT AngT
AUC:DT=0.82DepT=0.84AnxT=0.87AngT=0.685
![Page 23: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
DT DepTVsHADS-D
AnxT AngT
AUC:DT=0.67DepT=0.75AnxT=0.62AngT=0.69
![Page 24: IPOS09 - How Accurate is the HADS as a Screen for Emotional Complications of Cancer (June09)](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022060106/54bee1ad4a7959a2388b45fe/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Credits & Acknowledgments
Elena Baker-Glenn University of NottinghamPaul Symonds Leicester Royal InfirmaryChris Coggan Leicester General HospitalBurt Park University of NottinghamLorraine Granger Leicester Royal InfirmaryMark Zimmerman Brown University, Rhode IslandBrett Thombs McGill University CanadaJames Coyne University of PennsylvaniaNick Meader National Collaborative Centre MH
For more information www.psycho-oncology.info