Roy C Martin1, Adam Gerstenecker1, Louis B Nabors1, Daniel C Marson1, Kristen L Triebel1. 1. Department of Neurology , Division of Neuropsychology, University of Alabama at Birmingham , Birmingham, Alabama (R.C.M., A.G., D.C.M., K.L.T.); Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham , Birmingham, Alabama (L.B.N.); Department of Neurology , Division of Neuro-Oncology, University of Alabama at Birmingham , Birmingham, Alabama (L.B.N.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the relationship between medical decisional capacity (MDC) and Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) in adults with malignant brain tumors. METHODS: Participants were 71 adults with primary (n = 26) or metastatic (n = 45) brain tumors. Testing to determine KPS scores and MDC was performed as close together as possible for each patient. Participants were administered a standardized measure of medical decision-making capacity (Capacity to Consent to Treatment Instrument [CCTI]) to assess 3 treatment consent abilities (ie, appreciation, reasoning, and understanding). Capacity classifications (ie, capable, marginally capable, and incapable) were established using cut scores previously derived from healthy control CCTI performance. RESULTS: The majority of participants had KPS scores of 90-100 (n = 39), with the remainder divided between KPS scores of 70-80 (n = 26) and 50-60 (n = 6). Comparisons between persons with KPS scores of 90-100 or 70-80 revealed significant differences on the CCTI consent standards of understanding and appreciation. Participants with KPS ratings of 90-100 achieved 46% capable classifications across all CCTI standards, in contrast with 23% of participants with KPS ratings of 70-80, and 0% of participants with KPS ratings of 50-60. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial portion of brain-tumor patients with KPS scores reflecting only minimal disability nonetheless demonstrated impairments on standardized measures of MDC. Clinicians working with this adult population should carefully screen for capacity to make clinical treatment decisions regardless of functional/performance status.
BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the relationship between medical decisional capacity (MDC) and Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) in adults with malignant brain tumors. METHODS:Participants were 71 adults with primary (n = 26) or metastatic (n = 45) brain tumors. Testing to determine KPS scores and MDC was performed as close together as possible for each patient. Participants were administered a standardized measure of medical decision-making capacity (Capacity to Consent to Treatment Instrument [CCTI]) to assess 3 treatment consent abilities (ie, appreciation, reasoning, and understanding). Capacity classifications (ie, capable, marginally capable, and incapable) were established using cut scores previously derived from healthy control CCTI performance. RESULTS: The majority of participants had KPS scores of 90-100 (n = 39), with the remainder divided between KPS scores of 70-80 (n = 26) and 50-60 (n = 6). Comparisons between persons with KPS scores of 90-100 or 70-80 revealed significant differences on the CCTI consent standards of understanding and appreciation. Participants with KPS ratings of 90-100 achieved 46% capable classifications across all CCTI standards, in contrast with 23% of participants with KPS ratings of 70-80, and 0% of participants with KPS ratings of 50-60. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial portion of brain-tumorpatients with KPS scores reflecting only minimal disability nonetheless demonstrated impairments on standardized measures of MDC. Clinicians working with this adult population should carefully screen for capacity to make clinical treatment decisions regardless of functional/performance status.
Entities:
Keywords:
cerebral neoplasm; cognitive function; medical decision-making; medical ethics; treatment consent
Authors: O Okonkwo; H R Griffith; K Belue; S Lanza; E Y Zamrini; L E Harrell; J C Brockington; D Clark; R Raman; D C Marson Journal: Neurology Date: 2007-10-09 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Nicholas Butowski; Susan M Chang; Larry Junck; Lisa M DeAngelis; Lauren Abrey; Karen Fink; Tim Cloughesy; Kathleen R Lamborn; Andres M Salazar; Michael D Prados Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2008-09-17 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Helle Sorensen von Essen; Frantz Rom Poulsen; Rikke Hedegaard Dahlrot; Karin Piil; Karina Dahl Steffensen Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-06-16 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Andrea Pace; Johan A F Koekkoek; Martin J van den Bent; Helen J Bulbeck; Jane Fleming; Robin Grant; Heidrun Golla; Roger Henriksson; Simon Kerrigan; Christine Marosi; Ingela Oberg; Stefan Oberndorfer; Kathy Oliver; H Roeline W Pasman; Emilie Le Rhun; Alasdair G Rooney; Roberta Rudà; Simone Veronese; Tobias Walbert; Michael Weller; Wolfgang Wick; Martin J B Taphoorn; Linda Dirven Journal: Neurooncol Pract Date: 2020-07-16
Authors: Will Hewins; Karolis Zienius; James L Rogers; Simon Kerrigan; Mark Bernstein; Robin Grant Journal: Curr Oncol Rep Date: 2019-05-02 Impact factor: 5.075
Authors: Mackenzie E Fowler; Dario A Marotta; Richard E Kennedy; Adam Gerstenecker; Meredith Gammon; Kristen Triebel Journal: Brain Behav Date: 2021-10-02 Impact factor: 2.708
Authors: Jantine Geertruida Röttgering; Linda Douw; Philip C de Witt Hamer; Mathilde C M Kouwenhoven; Tom Würdinger; Peter M van de Ven; Louise Sharpe; Hans Knoop; Martin Klein Journal: Trials Date: 2022-07-15 Impact factor: 2.728
Authors: Rita C Crooms; Hung-Mo Lin; Sean Neifert; Stacie G Deiner; Jess W Brallier; Nathan E Goldstein; Jonathan S Gal; Laura P Gelfman Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2021-06-24 Impact factor: 2.947