Introducing the New Patient Expectations in Spine Oncology Questionnaire.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: It has been hypothesized that a discrepancy between pretreatment expectations and perceived outcomes is a significant source of patient dissatisfaction. Currently, there is lack in understanding and tools to assess patient expectations regarding the outcomes of treatment for spinal metastases. The objective of this study was therefore to develop a patient expectations questionnaire regarding the outcomes after surgery and/or radiotherapy for spinal metastases. METHODS: A multiphase international qualitative study was conducted. Phase 1 of the study included semistructured interviews with patients and relatives to understand their expectations of the outcomes of treatment. In addition, physicians were interviewed about their communication practices with patients regarding treatment and expected outcomes. In phase 2, items were developed based on the results of the interviews in phase 1. In phase 3, patients were interviewed to validate the content and language of the questionnaire. Selection of the final items was based on feedback from patients regarding content, language, and relevance. RESULTS: In phase 1, 24 patients and 22 physicians were included. A total of 34 items were developed for the preliminary questionnaire. After phase 3, a total of 22 items were retained for the final version of the questionnaire. The questionnaire is divided into 3 sections: (1) patient expectations regarding treatment outcomes, (2) prognosis, and (3) consultation with the physician. The items cover expectations related to pain, analgesia requirements, daily and physical function, overall quality of life, life expectancy, and information provided by the physician. CONCLUSION: The new Patient Expectations in Spine Oncology questionnaire was developed to evaluate patient expectations regarding the outcomes after treatment for spinal metastases. The Patient Expectations in Spine Oncology questionnaire will allow physicians to systematically assess patient expectations of planned treatment and thus help guide patients toward realistic expectations of treatment outcome.

Opinions on the preclinical evaluation of novel therapies for spinal cord injury: a comparison between researchers and spinal cord-injured individuals.

We previously conducted a survey to gather the opinions and perspectives of scientific and clinical researchers on what levels of preclinical evidence were needed to justify translating a promising neuroprotective or neuroregenerative therapy in spinal cord injury (SCI) into a human clinical trial (Kwon et al., 2010 ). Here we conducted an analogous survey of individuals living with SCI in which we gathered their expectations for the levels of preclinical evidence achieved by researchers in substantiating the neuroprotective and neuroregenerative therapies being offered to them in clinical trials. In total, 214 individuals with SCI completed the survey, and their responses were compared to the responses of the 235 scientists and clinicians who completed our previous survey. SCI individuals were more likely than SCI researchers to opine that demonstrating efficacy and safety in rodent models of SCI alone is sufficient to proceed with clinical trials. However, SCI individuals also reported strong support for large animal and primate model studies, and in the case of the latter, were actually more in agreement for the need for primate studies than researchers. SCI individuals also reported strong support for independent replication studies. In general, individuals with SCI had high expectations for the levels of preclinical evidence required to justify translating novel therapies into clinical trials. These expectations should be considered in the decisions to translate specific experimental therapies for SCI.