What questionnaires to use when measuring quality of life in sacral tumor patients: the updated sacral tumor survey

Palthe, Olivier D. R. van Wulfften; Janssen, Stein J.; Wunder, Jay S.; Ferguson, Peter C.; Guo, Wei; Rose, Peter S.; Yaszemski, M. J.; Sim, Franklin H.; Boland, Patrick J.; Healey, John H.; Hornicek, Francis J.; Schwab, Joseph H.

doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2016.11.004

Cited by 23 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 45 publications

(59 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As survival improves for orthopedic oncology patients, increased interest has developed in patient-reported outcomes (PROs), particularly for function and HRQoL. [28][29][30] The SF-36 is a generic measure of HRQoL and is widely used in healthcare to evaluate patient's self-perceived health. 31,32 Interpreting outcome measures presents a challenge, as statistical significance does not always translate into clinical significance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimal clinically important differences in SF‐36 global score: Current value in orthopedic oncology

Bartelstein

Yakoub

Nikolic

et al. 2020

Journal Orthopaedic Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The SF-36 is widely used to evaluate the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients with musculoskeletal tumors. Instead of typical methods, calculating the SF-36 Global Score has recently become an increasingly common reporting approach. However, numerical changes lack clear clinical relevance. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is useful for interpreting changes in functional scores by defining the smallest change patients may perceive as clinically meaningful.The aim of this study is to determine the MCID of the SF-36 Global Score in orthopedic oncology patients, which has not been reported to date. Three-hundred ten patients who underwent surgery and completed two surveys during postoperative follow-up were reviewed. The two most common methods for calculating the SF-36 Global Score were used: (1) anchor-based methods and receiver operating characteristic analysis based on one-half of the SD of change score and standard error of measurement at baseline and; (2) distribution-based methods. Using anchor-based methods, the MCIDs of SF-36 Global Scores #1 and #2 were 2.7 (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.85) and 2.5 (AUC = 0.79) for improvement, and −1.5 (AUC = 0.81) and −0.6 (AUC = 0.83) for deterioration, respectively. Using distribution-based methods, the MCIDs of SF-36 Global Scores #1 and #2 were 4.1 and 4.4 by half SD, and 4.1 and 4.5 by standard error of measurement, respectively. Our findings provide benchmark values, which can serve as a reference for future studies in musculoskeletal tumor patients using the SF-36 Global Score as a single measure for HRQoL. K E Y W O R D S anchor-based method, distribution-based method, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), minimal clinically important difference (MCID), sarcoma, SF-36 Global Score 1 | BACKGROUND Patient-derived outcome assessments are essential determinants of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in oncology and help inform treatment decisions for future musculoskeletal oncology patients. There has been a burgeoning of publications regarding HRQoL. 1 More generic instruments, such as SF-36 or Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System, are validated internationally for general orthopedic conditions. 2,3 However, these have not been evaluated critically in musculoskeletal oncology, although

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimal clinically important differences in SF‐36 global score: Current value in orthopedic oncology

Bartelstein

Yakoub

Nikolic

et al. 2020

Journal Orthopaedic Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Findings from Colman et al (73), concluded that PROMIS was a superior and more responsive tool compared to EQ-5D, NDI, and ODI for assessing quality of life for 27 patients who underwent surgery and eight patients who underwent RT for spine tumors. Another study by van Wulfften Palthe et al (74) compared PROMIS to number of older PRO measuring systems for patients with sacral spinal tumors, with the researchers recommending that PROMIS surveys be used to assess quality of life in areas such mental health, physical health, pain, gastrointestinal symptoms, sexual function, and social health. Given the comprehensiveness, efficiency, adaptability, and validity of PROMIS, the literature appears to be trending towards this becoming the gold standard for assessing PRO for metastatic spine disease.…”

Section: Promismentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment, complications, and outcomes of metastatic disease of the spine: from Patchell to PROMIS

Yahanda¹,

Buchowski²,

Wegner³

2019

Ann. Transl. Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spinal metastases are common in patients with cancer. As cancer treatments improve and these patients live longer, the number who present with metastatic spine disease will increase. Treatment strategies for these patients continues to evolve. In particular, since the prospective randomized controlled study in 2005 by Patchell et al. showed increased survival with decompressive surgical treatment of spinal metastases, there is a growing body of literature focusing on surgical management and complications of surgery for this disease. Surgery is often one component of a multimodal treatment approach with chemotherapy and radiation, which makes it difficult to parse the benefits of each individual treatment in outcome studies. Additionally, there has been more recent emphasis placed on patient-reported outcomes (PRO) after treatment for metastatic spine disease. In this review, we summarize treatments of metastatic spinal disease, possible perioperative complications, and validated tools used to assess outcomes for these patients.

show abstract

“…Lastly, patient reported outcomes were not collected for most patients in this study. While patient reported outcomes for chordomas and other primary spine tumors are still being defined, van Wulfften et al recently published a revised sacral tumor survey that may be appropriate to use in patients with sacral chordomas going forward (28).…”

Section: Study Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chordoma of the mobile spine and sacrum: clinical management and prognosis

D’Amore

Mesfin

2018

J Spine Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Chordomas are rare malignant tumors of the spinal column often afflicting the upper cervical spine and sacrum. There are few large single center series on chordomas due to its rarity. The purpose of this study is to report a single center's experience with the operative and non-operative management of chordomas. Methods: We evaluated our institution's pathology database from 1994 to 2016 to identify patients diagnosed with chordomas. Inclusion criteria were chordomas of the mobile spine and sacrum. Exclusion criteria were chordomas of the clivus and resection performed at another institution. We collected patient demographics as well as the type of resection performed, intra-operative complications, wound complications and recurrence/prognosis. Results: We identified 18 patients diagnosed with chordomas at our institution, and 12 met our inclusion criteria. There were four females and eight males with an average age of 64 [32-87] years. All patients were Caucasian and 10 of the 12 had surgery. Of the two patients with sacral chordomas that did not have surgery, one received chemotherapy and the other did not elect for any treatment. One is alive 161 months following diagnosis and the second died 96 months following diagnosis. Five of the lesions were in the mobile spine (one cervical, two thoracic, two lumbar) and seven were in the sacrum. Six patients underwent an en bloc resection [two via total en bloc spondylectomy (TES)]. Average length of follow up is 60 [3-161] months and eight of 12 patients are alive at latest follow up. Intraoperative complications included cardiac arrest, pleural tear, and excessive blood loss (8 L). Two patients, with sacral chordomas, had wound complications. Recurrence occurred in one patient with piecemeal resection and one patient with incomplete resection had postoperative metastatic lesions to the liver and lung. Conclusions: We found less recurrence in patients managed with an en bloc resection as opposed to piece meal or intralesional resections. Sacral chordoma patients had higher wound complication rates as compared to chordomas of the mobile spine. The long life expectancy of non-surgically managed patients underscores the indolent nature of chordomas.

show abstract

What questionnaires to use when measuring quality of life in sacral tumor patients: the updated sacral tumor survey

Cited by 23 publications

References 45 publications

Minimal clinically important differences in SF‐36 global score: Current value in orthopedic oncology

Minimal clinically important differences in SF‐36 global score: Current value in orthopedic oncology

Treatment, complications, and outcomes of metastatic disease of the spine: from Patchell to PROMIS

Chordoma of the mobile spine and sacrum: clinical management and prognosis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About