Wyatt MacNevin, Ryan Lukic, Gabriela Ilie, Ricardo A Rendon, Ross Mason, Andrea Kokorovic, Greg Bailly, Nikhilesh Patil, David Bowes, Robert Rutledge
{"title":"前列腺癌患者的心理困扰:交叉随机临床试验对K10量表的验证","authors":"Wyatt MacNevin, Ryan Lukic, Gabriela Ilie, Ricardo A Rendon, Ross Mason, Andrea Kokorovic, Greg Bailly, Nikhilesh Patil, David Bowes, Robert Rutledge","doi":"10.5489/cuaj.9294","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Men diagnosed with prostate cancer (PCa) experience substantial psychological distress. Despite this, the use of screening tools in this population is limited and understudied. This study evaluates the validity of the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) as a psychological distress screening tool in men undergoing curative PCa treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants in a PCa psychological distress prevention program (n=128) were assessed at baseline, six months, and 12 months using the K10. Exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) examined the scale's factor structure. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses evaluated sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values for depression and anxiety. Logistic regression assessed the impact of cutoffs on clinical psychological distress.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>EFA identified a single-factor structure (factor loadings: 0.59-0.96, variance explained: 76%). CFA confirmed model-fit (CFI=0.905; SRMR=0.042). ROC analysis demonstrated excellent predictive ability (area under the curve [AUC] 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.95-1.0 for depression; 0.92, 95% CI 0.86-0.98 for anxiety). Youden's index suggested K10 thresholds of ≥17.5 (depression) and ≥16.5 (anxiety), although these cutoffs lacked sensitivity. With standard K10≥20 cutoffs, significant differences were observed between intervention and control groups at six months (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.59, 95% CI 1.12-11.51, p=0.031) and 12 months (aOR 4.41, 95% CI 1.35-4.41, p=0.014), consistent with prior findings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The K10 is valid and reliable for this population, demonstrating excellent internal consistency; however, lower cutoffs (K10≥16.5, K10≥17.5) may reduce sensitivity. The standard K10≥20 threshold remains preferable for detecting distress and evaluating intervention effects in men with PCa.</p>","PeriodicalId":50613,"journal":{"name":"Cuaj-Canadian Urological Association Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychological distress in prostate cancer: Validation of the K10 scale using a crossover randomized clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Wyatt MacNevin, Ryan Lukic, Gabriela Ilie, Ricardo A Rendon, Ross Mason, Andrea Kokorovic, Greg Bailly, Nikhilesh Patil, David Bowes, Robert Rutledge\",\"doi\":\"10.5489/cuaj.9294\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Men diagnosed with prostate cancer (PCa) experience substantial psychological distress. Despite this, the use of screening tools in this population is limited and understudied. This study evaluates the validity of the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) as a psychological distress screening tool in men undergoing curative PCa treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants in a PCa psychological distress prevention program (n=128) were assessed at baseline, six months, and 12 months using the K10. Exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) examined the scale's factor structure. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses evaluated sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values for depression and anxiety. Logistic regression assessed the impact of cutoffs on clinical psychological distress.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>EFA identified a single-factor structure (factor loadings: 0.59-0.96, variance explained: 76%). CFA confirmed model-fit (CFI=0.905; SRMR=0.042). ROC analysis demonstrated excellent predictive ability (area under the curve [AUC] 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.95-1.0 for depression; 0.92, 95% CI 0.86-0.98 for anxiety). Youden's index suggested K10 thresholds of ≥17.5 (depression) and ≥16.5 (anxiety), although these cutoffs lacked sensitivity. With standard K10≥20 cutoffs, significant differences were observed between intervention and control groups at six months (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.59, 95% CI 1.12-11.51, p=0.031) and 12 months (aOR 4.41, 95% CI 1.35-4.41, p=0.014), consistent with prior findings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The K10 is valid and reliable for this population, demonstrating excellent internal consistency; however, lower cutoffs (K10≥16.5, K10≥17.5) may reduce sensitivity. The standard K10≥20 threshold remains preferable for detecting distress and evaluating intervention effects in men with PCa.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50613,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cuaj-Canadian Urological Association Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cuaj-Canadian Urological Association Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.9294\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cuaj-Canadian Urological Association Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.9294","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
简介:诊断为前列腺癌(PCa)的男性经历了大量的心理困扰。尽管如此,筛查工具在这一人群中的使用是有限的,而且研究不足。本研究评估Kessler心理困扰量表(K10)作为心理困扰筛查工具在接受根治性前列腺癌治疗的男性中的有效性。方法:采用K10在基线、6个月和12个月时对PCa心理困扰预防项目的参与者(n=128)进行评估。探索性因子分析(EFA)和验证性因子分析(CFA)检验了量表的因子结构。受试者工作特征(ROC)分析评估了抑郁和焦虑的敏感性、特异性和预测值。Logistic回归评估截止点对临床心理困扰的影响。结果:EFA确定了一个单因素结构(因子负荷:0.59-0.96,方差解释:76%)。CFA证实了模型拟合(CFI=0.905; SRMR=0.042)。ROC分析显示了出色的预测能力(抑郁的曲线下面积[AUC] 0.98, 95%可信区间[CI] 0.95-1.0;焦虑的曲线下面积[CI] 0.92, 95% CI 0.86-0.98)。约登指数提示K10阈值≥17.5(抑郁)和≥16.5(焦虑),尽管这些截止值缺乏敏感性。在标准K10≥20的临界值下,干预组和对照组在6个月时(调整优势比[aOR] 3.59, 95% CI 1.12-11.51, p=0.031)和12个月时(调整优势比[aOR] 4.41, 95% CI 1.35-4.41, p=0.014)观察到显著差异,与先前的研究结果一致。结论:K10对该人群有效可靠,具有良好的内部一致性;然而,较低的截止值(K10≥16.5,K10≥17.5)可能会降低灵敏度。标准的K10≥20阈值仍然是检测前列腺癌患者痛苦和评估干预效果的首选。
Psychological distress in prostate cancer: Validation of the K10 scale using a crossover randomized clinical trial.
Introduction: Men diagnosed with prostate cancer (PCa) experience substantial psychological distress. Despite this, the use of screening tools in this population is limited and understudied. This study evaluates the validity of the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) as a psychological distress screening tool in men undergoing curative PCa treatment.
Methods: Participants in a PCa psychological distress prevention program (n=128) were assessed at baseline, six months, and 12 months using the K10. Exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) examined the scale's factor structure. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses evaluated sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values for depression and anxiety. Logistic regression assessed the impact of cutoffs on clinical psychological distress.
Results: EFA identified a single-factor structure (factor loadings: 0.59-0.96, variance explained: 76%). CFA confirmed model-fit (CFI=0.905; SRMR=0.042). ROC analysis demonstrated excellent predictive ability (area under the curve [AUC] 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.95-1.0 for depression; 0.92, 95% CI 0.86-0.98 for anxiety). Youden's index suggested K10 thresholds of ≥17.5 (depression) and ≥16.5 (anxiety), although these cutoffs lacked sensitivity. With standard K10≥20 cutoffs, significant differences were observed between intervention and control groups at six months (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.59, 95% CI 1.12-11.51, p=0.031) and 12 months (aOR 4.41, 95% CI 1.35-4.41, p=0.014), consistent with prior findings.
Conclusions: The K10 is valid and reliable for this population, demonstrating excellent internal consistency; however, lower cutoffs (K10≥16.5, K10≥17.5) may reduce sensitivity. The standard K10≥20 threshold remains preferable for detecting distress and evaluating intervention effects in men with PCa.
期刊介绍:
CUAJ is a a peer-reviewed, open-access journal devoted to promoting the highest standard of urological patient care through the publication of timely, relevant, evidence-based research and advocacy information.