2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/165271
Category:
Abstract
Type:
Presentation
Title:
DIFFERENTIATING SYMPTOM DISTRESS FROM INTENSITY AND FREQUENCY
Author(s):
Goodell, Teresa
Author Details:
Teresa Goodell, RN, CNS, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA
Abstract:
The concept of symptom distress is inconsistently defined in the cancer literature. Identifying its meaning to people with cancer and understanding differences among symptom intensity, frequency and distress will clarify the concept and may enhance symptom management efforts. This dual-methods pilot study aimed to: 1) quantitatively identify differences in symptom intensity, frequency and distress and 2) qualitatively describe the meaning of symptom distress to people with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Self-regulation theory guided the conceptualization of symptoms as possessing intensity, frequency and distress dimensions. Twenty outpatients with NSCLC completed the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale. Numerical scales from 1-4 evaluate frequency and intensity. Distress is scaled 0-4, offering a zero distress response option on endorsed symptoms. Twelve participants have been interviewed about perceptions of symptom distress. Descriptive qualitative analysis with expert input was used to code interviews and collapse codes into categories. Aim 1) Mean symptom frequency, intensity and distress scores were calculated and correlations among them computed. ANOVA was used to examine differences among means. Aim 2) Descriptive qualitative analysis was used to code semi-structured interviews with twelve participants. Codes were collapsed into categories. Aim 1) Correlations among symptom intensity, frequency and distress were high (all r > .87, p <.001), but repeated measures ANOVA with intensity, frequency and distress as the within-subjects factor showed highly significantly different means (F = 74.6, p<.001). With the distress dimension recoded to synchronize scaling of the three dimensions, paired t-tests revealed that frequency and distress were higher than intensity (p<.01 in both cases). Before recoding, all three symptom dimensions were significantly different. Aim 2) Preliminary analysis has revealed five categories: life disruption, uncertainty, the unexpected, going it alone, and emotional upset. Interviews will continue until saturation is reached; data will be reanalyzed in consultation with a senior qualitative researcher. This study found quantitative differences that distinguished symptom intensity from distress, but not from frequency. Qualitative analysis suggests that participants viewed symptom distress broadly in relation to difficult aspects of the cancer experience. Clinicians and researchers may use these findings to better understand symptom distress when interpreting subjective symptom reports.
Repository Posting Date:
27-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
27-Oct-2011
Conference Date:
2005
Conference Name:
30th Annual Oncology Nursing Society Congress
Conference Host:
Oncology Nursing Society
Conference Location:
Orlando, Florida, USA
Note:
This is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.type.categoryAbstracten_US
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleDIFFERENTIATING SYMPTOM DISTRESS FROM INTENSITY AND FREQUENCYen_GB
dc.contributor.authorGoodell, Teresaen_US
dc.author.detailsTeresa Goodell, RN, CNS, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USAen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/165271-
dc.description.abstractThe concept of symptom distress is inconsistently defined in the cancer literature. Identifying its meaning to people with cancer and understanding differences among symptom intensity, frequency and distress will clarify the concept and may enhance symptom management efforts. This dual-methods pilot study aimed to: 1) quantitatively identify differences in symptom intensity, frequency and distress and 2) qualitatively describe the meaning of symptom distress to people with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Self-regulation theory guided the conceptualization of symptoms as possessing intensity, frequency and distress dimensions. Twenty outpatients with NSCLC completed the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale. Numerical scales from 1-4 evaluate frequency and intensity. Distress is scaled 0-4, offering a zero distress response option on endorsed symptoms. Twelve participants have been interviewed about perceptions of symptom distress. Descriptive qualitative analysis with expert input was used to code interviews and collapse codes into categories. Aim 1) Mean symptom frequency, intensity and distress scores were calculated and correlations among them computed. ANOVA was used to examine differences among means. Aim 2) Descriptive qualitative analysis was used to code semi-structured interviews with twelve participants. Codes were collapsed into categories. Aim 1) Correlations among symptom intensity, frequency and distress were high (all r &gt; .87, p &lt;.001), but repeated measures ANOVA with intensity, frequency and distress as the within-subjects factor showed highly significantly different means (F = 74.6, p&lt;.001). With the distress dimension recoded to synchronize scaling of the three dimensions, paired t-tests revealed that frequency and distress were higher than intensity (p&lt;.01 in both cases). Before recoding, all three symptom dimensions were significantly different. Aim 2) Preliminary analysis has revealed five categories: life disruption, uncertainty, the unexpected, going it alone, and emotional upset. Interviews will continue until saturation is reached; data will be reanalyzed in consultation with a senior qualitative researcher. This study found quantitative differences that distinguished symptom intensity from distress, but not from frequency. Qualitative analysis suggests that participants viewed symptom distress broadly in relation to difficult aspects of the cancer experience. Clinicians and researchers may use these findings to better understand symptom distress when interpreting subjective symptom reports.en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-27T12:15:34Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-27en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-27T12:15:34Z-
dc.conference.date2005en_US
dc.conference.name30th Annual Oncology Nursing Society Congressen_US
dc.conference.hostOncology Nursing Societyen_US
dc.conference.locationOrlando, Florida, USAen_US
dc.description.noteThis is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.-
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.