评估前庭神经鞘瘤管理对个人财务的影响。
Assessing the personal financial impact of vestibular schwannoma management.
文献信息
| PMID | 42722776 |
|---|---|
| 原文 | 在 PubMed 查看原文 ↗ |
| 发表日期 | 2026 |
| 作者 | Robert J Macielak |
| 作者单位 | Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, 43212, USA. robertmacielak@gmail.com. |
| 期刊 | Journal of neuro-oncology |
| SCI 分区 | Q2 |
| IF | 3.6 |
| 研究类型 | 临床研究 · 临床 |
| 所属专科 | 耳科 |
中文摘要
目的： 通过由听神经瘤协会（ANA）主办的一项调查，探讨前庭神经鞘瘤（VS）管理对个人财务的影响。
方法： 创建了一项横断面调查，向患有VS的参与者询问与其个人财务和就业相关的问题，特别强调财务毒性，该毒性通过财务毒性综合评分（COST）评估和财务困扰问卷（FDQ）进行测量。
结果： 在研究完成时，有41名受访者完全完成了所提供的调查，其中大多数在干预时年龄>50岁（24名参与者，59%）且为女性（33名参与者，80%）。29名参与者（71%）报告接受了VS的显微外科切除术，9名（22%）记录接受了放射治疗，3名（7%）描述接受了两种方式的联合治疗。在开始管理后，11名受访者（27%）经历了就业变化，17名（41%）经历了工作职责变化，包括工时变化、活动减少或新失业。COST问卷的中位得分为32（IQR 15-39）。在FDQ上，仅4名受访者（10%）被注意到有中度财务毒性，2名（5%）报告有严重财务毒性。
结论： 在接受调查的治疗后VS患者中，可以观察到就业以及工作职责的变化；然而，这些变化的最终财务毒性似乎有限，很少有患者经历严重的经济困难。通过前瞻性研究对这一点进行进一步研究，可以更好地识别与个人财务困难相关的风险因素，并提高普遍性。
英文摘要
PURPOSE: To investigate the personal financial impact of vestibular schwannoma (VS) management through a survey hosted by the Acoustic Neuroma Association (ANA).
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was created to ask participants with a VS questions relating to their personal finances and employment with a specific emphasis on financial toxicity, with this toxicity being measured through the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) assessment and the Financial Distress Questionnaire (FDQ).
RESULTS: At the time of study completion, 41 respondents had fully completed the provided survey, with the majority being > 50-years-old at the time of intervention (24 participants, 59%) and female (33 participants, 80%). Twenty-nine participants (71%) reported undergoing microsurgical resection of their VS, 9 (22%) documented undergoing radiation therapy, and 3 (7%) described undergoing a combination of both modalities. After initiation of management, 11 respondents (27%) experienced a change in employment and 17 (41%) experienced a change in their duties at work, including change in hours, reduced activity, or new unemployment. The median score on the COST questionnaire was 32 (IQR 15-39). On the FDQ, only 4 respondents (10%) were noted to have moderate financial toxicity and 2 (5%) reported severe financial toxicity.
CONCLUSIONS: Among surveyed VS patients after treatment, change in employment as well as job duties can be observed; however, the ultimate financial toxicity of these changes appears limited, with few patients experiencing substantial financial hardship. Further study of this point through prospective study could better identify risk factors associated with personal financial difficulty and improve generalizability.