MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among breast cancer patients at University Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Center (UKMMC), Kuala Lumpur. A total of 205 patients who were diagnosed between 2007 until 2010 were interviewed using the questionnaires of Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HADS). The associated factors investigated concerned socio-demographics, socio economic background and the cancer status. Descriptive analysis, chi-squared tests and logistic regression were used for the statistical test analysis.
RESULTS: The prevalence of anxiety was 31.7% (n=65 ) and of depression was 22.0% (n=45) among the breast cancer patients. Age group (p= 0.032), monthly income (p=0.015) and number of visits per month (p=0.007) were significantly associated with anxiety. For depression, marital status (p=0.012), accompanying person (p=0.041), financial support (p-0.007) and felt burden (p=0.038) were significantly associated. In binary logistic regression, those in the younger age group were low monthly income were 2 times more likely to be associated with anxiety. Having less financial support and being single were 3 and 4 times more likely to be associated with depression.
CONCLUSIONS: In management of breast cancer patients, more care or support should be given to the young and low socio economic status as they are at high risk of anxiety and depression.
Methods: A comparative cross-sectional study was conducted on the interviewed and non-interviewed cohorts. Their examination marks were obtained from the academic office, psychological health was measured by DASS-21, personality traits were measured by USMaP-15, and emotional intelligence was measured by USMEQ-17.
Results: The interviewed cohort performed significantly better in the clinical examination than the non-interviewed cohort. Conversely, the non-interviewed cohort performed significantly better in the theoretical examination. Depression, anxiety, and stress level between the two cohorts showed no difference. The interviewed cohort demonstrated more desirable personality traits, higher emotional intelligence, and social competence than the non-interviewed cohort.
Discussion: This study provides evidence to support the claim that the interview-based admission process has favourable outcomes on clinical performance, emotional intelligence, and personality traits. Several insights gained as a result of this study are discussed.
Methods: We used a single-blind, randomized controlled crossover equivalence design to compare the efficacy on N.A. regulation of W.A.R.A. versus Distraction in 101 patients with different neuropsychiatric disorders.
Results: The results showed a significant difference (p < 0.001) in response to W.A.R.A. vs. Distraction, with W.A.R.A. being significantly more effective in regulating N.A., with a large effect size (dRMpooled = 2.38) and a high probability (95%) of success.
Limitations: The heterogeneity of the study population makes generalization and clear recommendations for specific patient groups difficult. The Numeric Rating Scale might have prevented detection of increased N.A. when the baseline scores were high. More in-depth research is needed to explore the W.A.R.A. technique and the extent of confounding variables such as the placebo effect.
Conclusions: The findings suggest that W.A.R.A. may be an effective, accessible, and brief intervention reducing negative affect. Although premature, these first results are encouraging.