Returning to work: a qualitative study of the experiences of head and neck cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: UK head and neck cancer incidence and prevalence in working-age people are increasing. Work is important for individuals and society. Head and neck cancer survivors return to work less than other cancer survivors. Treatment affects physical and psychological functioning long-term. Evidence is limited, with no UK qualitative studies. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted, underpinned by a critical realism approach, involving semi-structured interviews with working head and neck cancer survivors. Interviews were conducted using the Microsoft Teams communication platform and interpreted using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Thirteen head and neck cancer survivors participated. Three themes were drawn from the data: changed meaning of work and identity, return-to-work experiences, and the impact of healthcare professionals on returning to work. Physical, speech and psychosocial changes affected workplace interactions, including stigmatising responses by work colleagues. CONCLUSION: Participants were challenged by returning to work. Work interactions and context influenced return-to-work success. Head and neck cancer survivors want return-to-work conversations within healthcare consultations, but perceived these as absent.

Unexpected benefits of pandemic guidelines for the management of epistaxis

Aim: The Royal Victoria Hospital adopted ENT UK's pandemic guidelines for the management of epistaxis. We aimed to reduce ENT referrals, inpatient admissions and staff exposure to COVID-19 whilst maintaining patient safety. This involved collaboration with ED to promote the use of absorbable packs and pharmacological alternatives over rhinoscopy & rigid endoscopy with cautery +/- non-absorbable packs. Method: Data was collected on patients presenting with epistaxis over a six-week period beginning March 2020 and the same period in 2019. Key factors recorded were number of presentations, ENT referrals, admissions, and their durations, along with management and outcomes. ENT provided training to ED staff and produced video resources for the 'My ED' app. Feedback from ED and patient data was gathered to improve training and assess effectiveness. Results: Pre-pandemic, 48% of ED epistaxis presentations were referred to ENT vs. 28% following the guidelines introduction. In 2019 49% of referrals were admitted vs. 42% in 2020. The average in-patient stay was reduced from four nights to one. Re-admission rate remained similar from 22% in 2019 to 20% in 2020. These results were achieved following repeated improvements to the training sessions. Conclusions: The ENT UK guidelines, when supplemented with ED collaboration, are effective at reducing ENT referrals and admissions. In addition to reducing COVID-19 exposure, the guidelines offered an improved patient experience (less invasive intervention, reduced/removed in-patient stay) with no loss of efficacy. This, combined with a reduced treatment cost of ∼£2,000 per in-patient, suggests the guidelines have long-termvalue out-with a pandemic setting.