Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Typ-2-Diabetes und Adipositas Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende Patientenratgeber
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Supportive Care in Cancer
Erschienen in:

27.01.2022 | Original Article

Needs assessment in patients surgically treated for head and neck cancer—a randomized controlled trial

verfasst von: Annelise Mortensen, Irene Wessel, Simon N. Rogers, Anders Tolver, Mary Jarden

Erschienen in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Ausgabe 5/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the effect and feasibility of a head and neck cancer–specific needs assessment tool integrated into nursing rehabilitation consultations early in the post-surgical period on quality of life, symptom burden, and referrals for multidisciplinary follow-up.

Methods

Ninety-two surgically treated patients with head and neck cancer were enrolled in a two-arm randomized controlled trial. All participants received nursing rehabilitation consultations prior to discharge, and two weeks and two months post-operative. The intervention group had their needs assessed using Patient Concerns Inventory, while standard care used a systematic questioning approach. Primary outcome was quality of life. Secondary outcomes were symptom burden and referrals for multidisciplinary rehabilitation follow-up.

Results

No significant differences were found in quality of life or symptom burden between groups. However, 35% more patients in the intervention group were referred for rehabilitation. The attrition rate was similar in both groups, with a dropout rate of six in each group. No patients declined using the Patient Concerns Inventory.

Conclusion

The intervention showed no improvement in QoL or symptom burden compared to standard care. However, the results suggest that important needs were identified and addressed. Especially emotional and existential needs, which were accommodated through referrals and professional advice. Nursing rehabilitation consultations using the Patient Concerns Inventory are feasible and may ensure that patient preferences and priorities are incorporated in their care.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.com (NCT03443258). Date of registration: May 31st, 2018.
Literatur
1.
Mortensen A, Jarden M (2016) “Early and late physical and psychosocial effects of primary surgery in patients with oral and oropharyngeal cancers: a systematic review,” Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol, vol. 121, no. 6
2.
Nelke KH, Pawlak W, Gerber H, Leszczyszyn J (2014) Head and neck cancer patients’ quality of life. Adv Clin Exp Med 23(6):1019–1027CrossRef
3.
Ringash J (2015), “Survivorship and quality of life in head and neck cancer,” J Clin Oncol
4.
Nguyen NTA, Ringash J (2018) “Head and neck cancer survivorship care: a review of the current guidelines and remaining unmet needs,” Curr Treat Options Oncol, vol. 19, no. 8
5.
Giuliani M (2016) “Prevalence and nature of survivorship needs in patients with head and neck cancer,” Head Neck, vol. July, pp. 1097–1103
6.
Ringash J, et al. (2018) “Head and neck cancer survivorship: learning the needs, meeting the needs,” in Seminars in Radiation Oncology
7.
Ba Murphy, Gilbert J (2009) Dysphagia in head and neck cancer patients treated with radiation: assessment, sequelae, and rehabilitation. Semin Radiat Oncol 19(1):35–42CrossRef
8.
Danish Health Authority (2018) Forløbsprogram for rehabilitering og palliation i forbindelse med kraeft (Guideline for rehabilitation and Palliation in Cancer).
9.
10.
Hansson E, Carlström E, Olsson LE, Nyman J, Koinberg I (2017) Can a person-centred-care intervention improve health-related quality of life in patients with head and neck cancer? A randomized, controlled study. BMC Nurs 16(1):1–12CrossRef
11.
Van Der Meulen IC et al (2014) Long-term effect of a nurse-led psychosocial intervention on health-related quality of life in patients with head and neck cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Br J Cancer 110(3):593–601CrossRef
12.
Rogers S, Barber B (2017) Using PROMs to guide patients and practitioners through the head and neck cancer journey. Patient Relat Outcome Meas 8:133–142CrossRef
13.
Rogers SN, Lowe D, Brown JS, Vaughan ED (1999) The University of Washington head and neck cancer measure as a predictor of outcome following primary surgery for oral cancer. Head Neck 21(5):394–401CrossRef
14.
Bjelland I, Dahl AA, Haug TT, Neckelmann D (2002) The validity of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. J Psychosom Res 52(2):69–77CrossRef
15.
Rosenthal DI (2007) Measuring head and neck cancer symptom burden: the development and validation of the M. D. Anderson symptom inventory, Head and Neck module. Head Neck 29(10):923–931CrossRef
16.
Shunmugasundaram C, Rutherford C, Butow PN, Sundaresan P, Dhillon HM (2019) Content comparison of unmet needs self-report measures used in patients with head and neck cancer: a systematic review. Psychooncology 28(12):2295–2306CrossRef
17.
Rogers SN, Ahiaku S, Lowe D (2018) Is routine holistic assessment with a prompt list feasible during consultations after treatment for oral cancer ? Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 56(1):24–28CrossRef
18.
Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG (2009) Research electronic data capture (REDCap)-A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 42(2):377–381CrossRef
19.
Ribeiro K, Kowalski LP (2003) APACHE II, POSSUM and ASA scores and the risk of perioperative complications in patients with oral or oropharyngeal cancer. Arch Otolaryngol Neck Surg 129:739–745CrossRef
20.
21.
Ren J, et al. (2021) “Longitudinal health utility and symptom-tocixity trajectories in patients with head and neck cancer,” Cancer, vol. October 1, 2021.
22.
Allen-Ayodabo CO et al (2019) Symptom burden among head and neck cancer patients in the first year after diagnosis: association with primary treatment modality. Oral Oncol. 99(June):104434CrossRef
23.
Rogers SN, El-Sheikha J, Lowe D (2009) The development of a Patients Concerns Inventory (PCI) to help reveal patients concerns in the head and neck clinic. Oral Oncol 45(7):555–561CrossRef
24.
Dwamena and Fortin (2012) Smith’s Patient Centered Interviewing, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill Education Medical
25.
Aaronson NK (1993) The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 85:365–376CrossRef
26.
Osoba D, Rodrigues G, Myles J, Zee B, Pater J (1998) Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of- life scores. J Clin Oncol 16(1):139–144CrossRef
27.
Cleeland CS (2007) Symptom burden: multiple symptoms and their impact as patient-reported outcomes. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 77030(37):16–21CrossRef
28.
Cleeland CS, Mendoza TR (2011) Cancer Symptom Science. Measurement, Mechanisms and Management, 1st ed. New York: Cambridge University Press
29.
Charlson M (1987) A new method of classification of prognostic comorbidity for longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 40(5):373–383CrossRef
30.
Bowen DJ et al (2009) How we design feasibility studies. Am J Prev Med 36(5):452–457CrossRef
31.
Carrillo JF (2016) The impact of treatment on quality of life of patients with head and neck cancer and its association with prognosis. J Cancer Surg 42(2016):1614–1621
32.
R Core Team, “R: a language and environment for statistical computing.” R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, 2013.
33.
Rogers SN, Thomson F, Lowe D (2018) The Patient Concerns Inventory integrated as part of routine head and neck cancer follow-up consultations: frequency, case-mix, and items initiated by the patient. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 100(3):209–215CrossRef
34.
Bjordal K et al (2000) A 12 country field study of the EORTC QLQ-C30 (version 3.0) and the head and neck cancer specific module (EORTC QLQ-H&N35) in head and neck patients. Eur J Cancer 36:1796–1807CrossRef
35.
Kanatas A, Ghazali N, Lowe D, Rogers SN (2012) The identification of mood and anxiety concerns using the patients concerns inventory following head and neck cancer. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 41:429–436CrossRef
36.
Ghazali N, Cadwallader E, Lowe D, Humphris G, Ozakinci G, Rogers SN (2013) “Fear of recurrence among head and neck cancer survivors: longitudinal trends,” Psychooncology, 22(4)
37.
Protheroe J, Brooks H, Chew-Graham C, Gardner C, Rogers A (2013) ‘Permission to participate?’ A qualitative study of participation in patients from differing socio-economic backgrounds. J Health Psychol 18(8):1046–1055CrossRef
38.
Singer S, et al. (2012) “Predictors of emotional distress in patients with head and neck cancer,” Head Neck, vol. February, pp. 180–187
39.
Kjaer T et al (2016) Do we reach the patients with the most problems? Baseline data from the WebCan study among survivors of head-and-neck cancer, Denmark. J Cancer Surviv 10(2):251–260CrossRef
40.
Larsson M, Hedelin B, Athlin E (2007) A supportive nursing care clinic: conceptions of patients with head and neck cancer. Eur J Oncol Nurs 11(1):49–59CrossRef
41.
Boyes H, Barraclough J, Ratansi R, Rogers SN, Kanatas A (2018) Structured review of the patient-reported outcome instruments used in clinical trials in head and neck surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 56(3):161–167CrossRef
42.
Young J, Cund A, Renshaw M, Quigley A, Snowden A (2015) Improving the care of cancer patients: holistic needs assessment. Br J Nurs. 24(4):S 17-20CrossRef
43.
Duman-Lubberding S et al (2017) Durable usage of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice to monitor health-related quality of life in head and neck cancer patients. Support Care Cancer 25(12):3775–3783CrossRef
44.
Derks W, De Leeuw RJ, Hordijk GJ, Winnubst JA (2004) Quality of life in elderly patients with head and neck cancer one year after diagnosis. Head Neck 26(12):1045–1052CrossRef
45.
Olsen MH et al (2015) Socioeconomic position and stage at diagnosis of head and neck cancer - a nationwide study from DAHANCA. Acta Oncol 54(5):759–766CrossRef
46.
Winn DM et al (2015) The INHANCE consortium: toward a better understanding of the causes and mechanisms of head and neck cancer. Oral Dis 21(6):685–693CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Needs assessment in patients surgically treated for head and neck cancer—a randomized controlled trial
verfasst von
Annelise Mortensen
Irene Wessel
Simon N. Rogers
Anders Tolver
Mary Jarden
Publikationsdatum
27.01.2022
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Supportive Care in Cancer / Ausgabe 5/2022
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-021-06759-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2022

Impact of mindfulness-based stress reduction on female sexual function and mental health in patients with breast cancer

  • Original Article

Health-related quality of life among cancer patients and survivors and its relationship with current employment status

  • Original Article

Routine cancer treatments and their impact on physical function, symptoms of cancer-related fatigue, anxiety, and depression

  • Open Access
  • Review Article

Family experience of palliative sedation therapy: proportional vs. continuous deep sedation

  • Original Article

Clinical and pharmacoeconomic impact of subgroup analysis in onco-hematological patients

  • Review Article

Effectiveness of prosthetic rehabilitation and quality of life of older edentulous head and neck cancer survivors following resection of the maxilla: a cross-sectional study

  • Original Article

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

CDK4/6-Inhibitoren bei Brustkrebs in die Zweitlinie aufschieben?

Ergebnisse einer Phase-III-Studie sprechen dafür, dass die Behandlung mit CDK4/6-Inhibitoren bei fortgeschrittenem HR-positivem, HER2-negativem Brustkrebs auch auf die Zweitlinie verschoben werden könnte, ohne die onkologischen Ergebnisse zu kompromittieren.

Cannabisextrakt verbessert Antiemese bei Chemotherapie

Sprechen Krebskranke auf die übliche Antiemese während einer Chemotherapie nicht ausreichend an, lohnt sich möglicherweise eine Behandlung mit Cannabisextrakt. In einer Phase-2/3-Studie ließ sich die antiemetische Response mit einem solchen Extrakt erheblich verbessern.

Veränderung der Brustdichte beeinflusst das Krebsrisiko

Die radiologische Dichte des Mammagewebes ist mit dem Risiko assoziiert, an Brustkrebs zu erkranken. Dabei wirken sich laut Ergebnissen einer Studie auch Dichteänderungen aus. Fünf Verlaufsmuster lassen sich dabei unterscheiden.

PMBCL mit CMR: Radiatio kann ohne Risiko weggelassen werden

Patienten mit primär mediastinalem B-Zell-Lymphom (PMBCL), die nach der Induktionstherapie eine komplette metabolische Remission (CMR) erreichen und keine konsolidierende Bestrahlung erhalten, müssen offenbar keine Überlebensnachteile fürchten.

Update Onkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise