Associations Between Problem List Items and Clinically Significant Distress in Patients With Metastatic Spine Disease.

dc.contributor.author

Rowe, Dana G

dc.contributor.author

Woo, Joshua

dc.contributor.author

Yoo, Seeley

dc.contributor.author

Emerson, Jacqueline M

dc.contributor.author

O'Callaghan, Ellen

dc.contributor.author

Goodin, Michael

dc.contributor.author

Crowell, Kerri-Anne

dc.contributor.author

Bradley, Victoria

dc.contributor.author

Reynolds, Jeremy

dc.contributor.author

Johnson, Margaret O

dc.contributor.author

Erickson, Melissa M

dc.contributor.author

Goodwin, C Rory

dc.date.accessioned

2026-04-02T16:58:31Z

dc.date.available

2026-04-02T16:58:31Z

dc.date.issued

2025-06

dc.description.abstract

Study design

Retrospective cohort study.

Objective

This study aimed to identify sources of distress in patients with metastatic spine disease and elucidate factors associated with clinically significant distress.

Summary of background data

Distress is associated with poorer outcomes and lower quality of life in cancer patients. Patients with metastatic spine disease are particularly vulnerable to clinically significant levels of distress. However, specific factors contributing to distress in these patients have been largely unexplored.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed medical records of patients with metastatic spine disease (MSD) who underwent surgery from 2015 to 2023. We analyzed National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Distress Thermometer (DT) scores and Problem List items within 30 days before surgery, which was defined as "baseline" distress. We calculated the frequency of each problem and the proportion of patients with clinically significant distress (DT score ≥4). We used χ 2 tests to analyze associations between Problem List items and significant distress, with a significance threshold of P <0.05.

Results

Among 160 patients with MSD, 48.1% reported clinically significant distress. Patients most frequently reported Physical concerns (93.8%), followed by Emotional (55.6%) and Practical concerns (31.9%). The most common individual Problem List item was pain (72.5%), followed by fatigue (48.1%) and worry (41.2%). Emotional ( P =0.001), Practical ( P =0.04), and Social concerns ( P =0.039) were significantly associated with clinically significant distress, but Physical concerns were not ( P =0.05).

Conclusions

Though physical concerns were most common for patients with MSD, emotional and practical concerns were more strongly associated with significant distress among patients with metastatic spine disease. These findings highlight the need for multidisciplinary care focused on emotional and practical issues to enhance patients' quality of life.
dc.identifier

00007632-202506150-00006

dc.identifier.issn

0362-2436

dc.identifier.issn

1528-1159

dc.identifier.uri

https://hdl.handle.net/10161/34362

dc.language

eng

dc.publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

dc.relation.ispartof

Spine

dc.relation.isversionof

10.1097/brs.0000000000005343

dc.rights.uri

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0

dc.subject

Humans

dc.subject

Spinal Neoplasms

dc.subject

Retrospective Studies

dc.subject

Cohort Studies

dc.subject

Stress, Psychological

dc.subject

Quality of Life

dc.subject

Adult

dc.subject

Aged

dc.subject

Aged, 80 and over

dc.subject

Middle Aged

dc.subject

Female

dc.subject

Male

dc.subject

Psychological Distress

dc.title

Associations Between Problem List Items and Clinically Significant Distress in Patients With Metastatic Spine Disease.

dc.type

Journal article

duke.contributor.orcid

Johnson, Margaret O|0000-0003-1208-622X|0009-0005-5596-3407

duke.contributor.orcid

Goodwin, C Rory|0000-0002-6540-2751

pubs.begin-page

816

pubs.end-page

822

pubs.issue

12

pubs.organisational-group

Duke

pubs.organisational-group

Pratt School of Engineering

pubs.organisational-group

School of Medicine

pubs.organisational-group

Clinical Science Departments

pubs.organisational-group

Institutes and Centers

pubs.organisational-group

Thomas Lord Department of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science

pubs.organisational-group

Orthopaedic Surgery

pubs.organisational-group

Radiation Oncology

pubs.organisational-group

Duke Cancer Institute

pubs.organisational-group

Neurology

pubs.organisational-group

Neurology, General & Community Neurology

pubs.organisational-group

Neurosurgery

pubs.organisational-group

Neurosurgery

pubs.publication-status

Published

pubs.volume

50

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
ROWE_associations_between_problem_list_items_and.6.pdf
Size:
219.71 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format