Perceptions of the risks and benefits of upper limb transplantation among individuals with upper limb amputations.

BACKGROUND: Upper limb transplantation is a life-enhancing rather than life-saving procedure. Little research has investigated how individuals with upper limb amputations perceive the benefits and risks of this complex procedure. To address this knowledge gap, the authors conducted qualitative research with individuals with upper limb amputations to understand their perspectives. METHODS: Twenty-two individuals with upper limb amputations (age range, 24 to 73 years) participated in a focus group (n=5) or semistructured interview (n=17) about the benefits and risks of upper limb transplantation. Data were analyzed by means of constant comparative methods and a two-phase analysis process. RESULTS: Participants identified enhanced functional performance and improved appearance as the greatest potential benefits. Over half of participants indicated that function was a more important consideration than appearance. Enhanced function performance was a relative concept strongly influenced by individual expectations, which varied widely. Increased sensation, psychological well-being, and social acceptability were also described as potential benefits. Identified risks included health risks and the demands of transplantation and recovery, decreased functional performance, and uncertainty over outcomes from upper limb transplantation as an experimental procedure. Participants also expressed concerns regarding the psychological impact of negative outcomes and adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Participants had a large variation in their perceived importance of the many risks and benefits of upper limb transplantation. These findings elucidate how potential upper limb transplantation candidates evaluate the benefits and risks of the procedure. The findings can also inform important issues to address and outcomes to assess in the pretransplant and posttransplant settings.

Development of a symptom index for patients with primary brain tumors.

OBJECTIVES: This study's primary goals included identifying the highest priority symptoms of patients with advanced brain tumors on treatment, comparing patient priority ratings with those of oncology experts, and constructing a brief symptom index using combined input to assess these symptoms and concerns. METHODS: Fifty patients with advanced primary brain tumors and 10 physician experts were recruited from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network institutions and community support agencies. By using a 40-item symptom checklist, patients first selected up to 10 of the most important symptoms/concerns to monitor when assessing the value of drug treatment for brain tumors, then nominated up to 5 of the very most important concerns, and finally generated additional symptoms/concerns. By using the same checklist as patients, physicians rated each symptom/concern as disease- or treatment-related. RESULTS: By using the combined input, a 24-item National Comprehensive Cancer Network/Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Brain Symptom Index (NFBrSI-24) was developed. The NFBrSI-24 showed good internal consistency (α = 0.84), significantly differentiated patients with different levels of functional status (F2,47 = 8.21; P < .001), and demonstrated good convergent validity with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General functional, physical, social, emotional, and brain tumor-specific concerns (ρ = 0.59, 0.57, 0.40, 0.35, and 0.50, respectively; Ps < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The NFBrSI-24, an index of the symptoms in advanced brain tumors perceived as most important by both patients and clinicians, improves upon existing measures of brain tumor symptoms through better satisfaction of regulatory requirements for measure development. The findings suggest good reliability and validity, indicating that the NFBrSI-24 is a promising brief assessment of high-priority advanced brain tumor symptoms for research and clinical settings.

Measuring health-related quality of life in leukemia: the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy--Leukemia (FACT-Leu) questionnaire.

OBJECTIVE: Develop and validate a health-related quality-of-life (measure for patients with acute and chronic leukemia. METHODS: The study consisted of two phases: scale construction and scale validation. For the item-generation phase, a summary of the literature combined with qualitative results from item-generation interviews with 29 acute or chronic leukemia patients and 16 health care providers yielded an initial item pool reflecting leukemia-specific concerns and symptoms. Items underwent iterations of review and reduction according to defined retention criteria to support content validity, as defined by priority concerns of patients. Seventeen final leukemia-specific items were combined with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General to create the FACT-Leukemia (FACT-Leu) scale. For the validation phase, 79 individuals with acute or chronic leukemia completed questionnaires at three time points. RESULTS: All FACT-Leu subscale and aggregated scores showed high internal consistency (αs ranging from 0.75 to 0.96). Test-retest reliability was adequate for all subscales (intraclass correlation range 0.765-0.890). The FACT-Leu scale demonstrated good convergent validity, with significant correlations with quality-of-life criteria and performance status, in the expected direction. FACT-Leu subscale scores were significantly different among the three performance status change groups, suggesting good responsiveness to change. CONCLUSIONS: The FACT-Leu scale is a valid, reliable, and efficient measure of leukemia-specific health-related quality of life for acute and chronic disease.