• Todd C Edwards, Danielle C Lavallee, Zoya Bauer, Bryan A Comstock, Jeffrey G Jarvik, Donald L Patrick, Una E Makris, and Janna L Friedly.
• University of Washington, Departments of Health Services and Medicine, 1208 NE 43rd St, Seattle, WA 98195, USA. Electronic address: toddce@uw.edu.
• Spine J. 2015 Jul 1;15(7):1636-44.

Background ContextThere is growing concern that patient-reported outcomes (PROs) commonly used in clinical research evaluating treatments such as epidural steroid injections (ESIs) for lumbar spinal stenosis may not adequately capture outcomes of greatest importance to older adults.PurposeThe purpose of the study was to determine what outcomes are most important to older adults with spinal stenosis, how well commonly used PROs reflect what is most important to these participants, and which outcomes older adults with spinal stenosis would want improved to consider having ESI.Study Design/SettingThis is an outcome prioritization study.Patient SampleCommunity sample of 33 older adults with spinal stenosis were included.Outcome MeasuresThe outcome measures were Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire.MethodsThe methods involve individual sorting and ranking exercises followed by facilitated focus groups.ResultsHighest rated problem areas were "experiencing pain/discomfort" (88% of participants), "problems with physical function" (85%), "difficulty exercising" (73%), "difficulty participating in hobbies and leisure activities" (55%), and "problems with weakness" (52%). Only 10 of the 24 Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire items were rated by 50% or more of participants experiencing them as important enough to warrant ESI treatment.ConclusionsOlder adults with spinal stenosis rated problems related to pain and physical function as the most important outcomes to them. However, difficulty exercising and difficulty participating in hobbies and leisure activities were also among the most highly rated and were two areas not typically assessed in treatment studies. Commonly used PROs in spinal stenosis treatment studies may be insufficient to comprehensively assess outcomes from the patient perspective.Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

31 keywords...

hide…