Tony O' Brien

Bio: Tony O' Brien is an academic researcher from Cork University Hospital. The author has contributed to research in topics: Palliative care & Burnout. The author has an hindex of 1, co-authored 2 publications receiving 45 citations. Previous affiliations of Tony O' Brien include Marymount University & University College Cork.

Sensitivity and specificity of a two-question screening tool for depression in a specialist palliative care unit.

Abstract: Objectives: The primary objective in this study is to determine the sensitivity and specificity of a two-item screening interview for depression versus the formal psychiatric interview, in the setting of a specialist palliative in-patient unit so that we may identify those individuals suffering from depressive disorder and therefore optimise their management in this often-complex population. Methods: A prospective sample of consecutive admissions (n = 167) consented to partake in the study, and the screening interview was asked separately to the formal psychiatric interview. Results: The two-item questionnaire, achieved a sensitivity of 90.7% (95% CI 76.9—97.0) but a lower specificity of 67.7% (95% CI 58.7—75.7). The false positive rate was 32.3% (95% CI 24.3—41.3), but the false negative rate was found to be a low 9.3% (95% CI 3.0—23.1). A subgroup analysis of individuals with a past experience of depressive illness, (n = 95), revealed that a significant number screened positive for depression by the scr...

Assessing the impact of COVID-19 on healthcare staff at a combined elderly care and specialist palliative care facility: A cross-sectional study.

Abstract: Background:In the pre-COVID-19 era, healthcare professionals experienced stress and burnout. The international literature confirms that COVID-19 placed significant additional burdens on healthcare ...

Prevalence of depression, anxiety, and adjustment disorder in oncological, haematological, and palliative-care settings: a meta-analysis of 94 interview-based studies

Abstract: Summary Background Substantial uncertainty exists about prevalence of mood disorders in patients with cancer, including those in oncological, haematological, and palliative-care settings. We aimed to quantitatively summarise the prevalence of depression, anxiety, and adjustments disorders in these settings. Methods We searched Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, and Web of Knowledge for studies that examined well-defined depression, anxiety, and adjustment disorder in adults with cancer in oncological, haematological, and palliative-care settings. We restricted studies to those using psychiatric interviews. Studies were reviewed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and a proportion meta-analysis was done. Findings We identified 24 studies with 4007 individuals across seven countries in palliative-care settings. Meta-analytical pooled prevalence of depression defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Classification of Diseases (ICD) criteria was 16·5% (95% CI 13·1–20·3), 14·3% (11·1–17·9) for DSM-defined major depression, and 9·6% (3·6–18·1) for DSM-defined minor depression. Prevalence of adjustment disorder alone was 15·4% (10·1–21·6) and of anxiety disorders 9·8% (6·8–13·2). Prevalence of all types of depression combined was of 24·6% (17·5–32·4), depression or adjustment disorder 24·7% (20·8–28·8), and all types of mood disorder 29·0% (10·1–52·9). We identified 70 studies with 10 071 individuals across 14 countries in oncological and haematological settings. Prevalence of depression by DSM or ICD criteria was 16·3% (13·4–19·5); for DSM-defined major depression it was 14·9% (12·2–17·7) and for DSM-defined minor depression 19·2% (9·1–31·9). Prevalence of adjustment disorder was 19·4% (14·5–24·8), anxiety 10·3% (5·1–17·0), and dysthymia 2·7% (1·7–4·0). Combination diagnoses were common; all types of depression occurred in 20·7% (12·9–29·8) of patients, depression or adjustment disorder in 31·6% (25·0–38·7), and any mood disorder in 38·2% (28·4–48·6). There were few consistent correlates of depression: there was no effect of age, sex, or clinical setting and inadequate data to examine cancer type and illness duration. Interpretation Interview-defined depression and anxiety is less common in patients with cancer than previously thought, although some combination of mood disorders occurs in 30–40% of patients in hospital settings without a significant difference between palliative-care and non-palliative-care settings. Clinicians should remain vigilant for mood complications, not just depression. Funding None.

Screening for Emotional Distress in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review of Assessment Instruments

Abstract: Screening for emotional distress is becoming increasingly common in cancer care. This systematic review examines the psychometric properties of the existing tools used to screen patients for emotional distress, with the goal of encouraging screening programs to use standardized tools that have strong psychometrics. Systematic searches of MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases for English-language studies in cancer patients were performed using a uniform set of key words (eg, depression, anxiety, screening, validation, and scale), and the retrieved studies were independently evaluated by two reviewers. Evaluation criteria included the number of validation studies, the number of participants, generalizability, reliability, the quality of the criterion measure, sensitivity, and specificity. The literature search yielded 106 validation studies that described a total of 33 screening measures. Many generic and cancer-specific scales satisfied a fairly high threshold of quality in terms of their psychometric properties and generalizability. Among the ultrashort measures (ie, those containing one to four items), the Combined Depression Questions performed best in patients receiving palliative care. Among the short measures (ie, those containing five to 20 items), the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale demonstrated adequate psychometric properties. Among the long measures (ie, those containing 21-50 items), the Beck Depression Inventory and the General Health Questionaire-28 met all evaluation criteria. The PsychoSocial Screen for Cancer, the Questionnaire on Stress in Cancer Patients-Revised, and the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist are long measures that can also be recommended for routine screening. In addition, other measures may be considered for specific indications or disease types. Some measures, particularly newly developed cancer-specific scales, require further validation against structured clinical interviews (the criterion standard for validation measures) before they can be recommended.

Case identification of depression in patients with chronic physical health problems: a diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis of 113 studies.

Abstract: Background Depression is more likely in patients with chronic physical illness, and is associated with increased rates of disability and mortality. Effective treatment of depression may reduce morbidity and mortality. The use of two stem questions for case finding in diabetes and coronary heart disease is advocated in the Quality and Outcomes Framework, and has become normalised into primary care. Aim To define the most effective tool for use in consultations to detect depression in people with chronic physical illness. Design Meta-analysis. Method The following data sources were searched: CENTRAL, CINAHL, Embase, HMIC, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Knowledge, from inception to July 2009. Three authors selected studies that examined identification tools and used an interview-based ICD (International Classification of Diseases) or DSM (Diagnostic and statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) diagnosis of depression as reference standard. At least two authors independently extracted study characteristics and outcome data and assessed methodological quality. Results A total of 113 studies met the eligibility criteria, providing data on 20 826 participants. It was found that two stem questions, PHQ-9 (Patient Health Questionnaire), the Zung, and GHQ-28 (General Health Questionnaire) were the optimal measures for case identification, but no method was sufficiently accurate to recommend as a definitive case-finding tool. Limitations were the moderate-to-high heterogeneity for most scales and the facts that few studies used ICD diagnoses as the reference standard, and that a variety of methods were used to determine DSM diagnoses. Conclusion Assessing both validity and ease of use, the two stem questions are the preferred method. However, clinicians should not rely on the two-questions approach alone, but should be confident to engage in a more detailed clinical assessment of patients who score positively.

Are one or two simple questions sufficient to detect depression in cancer and palliative care? A Bayesian meta-analysis

Abstract: The purpose of this study is to examine the value of one or two simple verbal questions in the detection of depression in cancer settings. This study is a systematic literature search of abstract and full text databases to January 2008. Key authors were contacted for unpublished studies. Seventeen analyses were found. Of these, 13 were conducted in late stage palliative settings. (1) Single depression question: across nine studies, the prevalence of depression was 16%. A single 'depression' question enabled the detection of depression in 160 out of 223 true cases, a sensitivity of 72%, and correctly reassured 964 out of 1166 non-depressed cancer sufferers, a specificity of 83%. The positive predictive value (PPV) was 44% and the negative predictive value (NPV) 94%. (2) Single interest question: there were only three studies examining the 'loss-of-interest' question, with a combined prevalence of 14%. This question allowed the detection of 60 out of 72 cases (sensitivity 83%) and excluded 394 from 459 non-depressed cases (specificity of 86%). The PPV was 48% and the NPV 97%. (3) Two questions (low mood and low interest): five studies examined two questions with a combined prevalence of 17%. The two-question combination facilitated a diagnosis of depression in 138 of 151 true cases (sensitivity 91%) and gave correct reassurance to 645 of 749 non-cases (specificity 86%). The PPV was 57% and the NPV 98%. Simple verbal methods perform well at excluding depression in the non-depressed but perform poorly at confirming depression. The 'two question' method is significantly more accurate than either single question but clinicians should not rely on these simple questions alone and should be prepared to assess the patient more thoroughly.