Identification of Anxiety and Depression Symptoms in Patients With Cancer: Comparison Between Short and Long Web-Based Questionnaires

Background: Physicians and nurses in cancer care easily fail to detect symptoms of psychological distress because of barriers such as lack of time, training on screening methods, and knowledge about how to diagnose anxiety and depression. National guidelines in several countries recommend routine screening for emotional distress in patients with cancer, but in many clinics, this is not implemented. By inventing screening methods that are time-efficient, such as digitalized and automatized screenings with short instruments, we can alleviate the burden on patients and staff. Objective: The aim of this study was to compare Web-based versions of the ultrashort electronic Visual Analogue Scale (eVAS) anxiety and eVAS depression and the short Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) with Web-based versions of the longer Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale-Self-report (MADRS-S) and the State Trait Anxiety Inventory-State (STAI-S) with regard to their ability to identify symptoms of anxiety and depression in patients with cancer. Methods: Data were obtained from a consecutive sample of patients with newly diagnosed (<6 months) breast, prostate, or colorectal cancer or with recurrence of colorectal cancer (N=558). The patients were recruited at 4 hospitals in Sweden between April 2013 and September 2015, as part of an intervention study administered via the internet. All questionnaires were completed on the Web at the baseline assessment in the intervention study. Results: The ultrashort and short Web-based-delivered eVAS anxiety, eVAS depression and HADS were found to have an excellent ability to discriminate between persons with and without clinical levels of symptoms of anxiety and depression compared with recommended cutoffs of the longer instruments MADRS-S and STAI-S (area under the curve: 0.88-0.94). Cutoffs of >6 on HADS anxiety and >7 hundredths (hs) on eVAS anxiety identified patients with anxiety symptoms with high accuracy. For HADS depression, at a cutoff of >5 and eVAS depression at a cutoff of >7 hs, the accuracy was very high likewise. Conclusions: The use of the short and ultrashort tools, eVAS and HADS, may be a suitable initial method of Web-based screening in busy clinical settings. However, there are still a proportion of patients who lack access to the internet or the ability to use it. There is a need to find solutions for this group to find all the patients with psychological distress.