ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined health related Quality of Life (HR-QoL) during the treatment of head and neck cancer (HNC) with even fewer focusing on the impact of oral mucositis (OM) on HR-QoL. Studies performed during treatment of HNC makes it possible to follow fluctuations in HR-QoL, OM and other treatment related side effects. The aim was to prospectively analyze HR-QoL, changes in clinical variables and the impact of OM on HR-QoL during HNC treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were recruited before commencing curative cancer treatment and were given professional oral care weekly during oncologic treatment. HR-QoL was reported before, during (week 2, 4 and 6) and three months after treatment using the EORTC Quality of Life questionnaires C30 and H&N35 and the stimulated whole salivary secretion rate was determined at the same time-points. OM (erythema and ulceration) was registered using the Oral Mucositis Assessment Scale (OMAS), at baseline, weekly during treatment and post treatment. Differences in HR-QoL between different timepoints were analyzed. To analyze the impact of OM on HR-QoL the patients were categorized into two groups: no/mild OM (OMAS ulceration score 0-1) or severe OM (OMAS ulceration score ≥ 2) and HR-QoL was compared between the two OM groups at three timepoints during treatment. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients (43 men, 14 women), with a mean age of 58 years were included. Patients reported progressively impaired HR-QoL, with peak issues noted at weeks 4 and 6, particularly in social eating, senses, appetite loss, sticky saliva, and decreasing salivary secretion rates were determined. Patients with severe OM reported worse HR-QoL compared to those with no/mild OM. Persistent problems 3 months post treatment were appetite loss, dry mouth, senses (smell and taste) and problems with social eating. CONCLUSION: Patients experienced exacerbated symptoms and problems weeks 4 and 6 of oncological treatment, especially among those with severe OM, stressing the importance of clinically monitoring the patients to reduce and alleviate their symptoms. Persistent problems three months post treatment are likely associated with the reduced salivary secretion rate indicating that patients should be monitored also after completed oncological treatment.
Subject(s)
Head and Neck Neoplasms , Oral Health , Quality of Life , Stomatitis , Humans , Stomatitis/etiology , Stomatitis/psychology , Prospective Studies , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Head and Neck Neoplasms/psychology , Head and Neck Neoplasms/complications , Head and Neck Neoplasms/therapy , Aged , Adult , Xerostomia/psychology , Xerostomia/etiology , Follow-Up Studies , Saliva/metabolism , Saliva/chemistry , Salivation/drug effects , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To investigate current odontological care routines for patients treated for head and neck cancers in the county councils/regions (C/Rs) of Sweden. METHODS: An invitation to fill in a web-based questionnaire was sent to dentists/dental hygienists working in dental clinics in the 12 C/Rs, treating and responsible for the odontological care of patients undergoing treatment for cancer of the head and neck. The questionnaire started with two mandatory and one non-mandatory questions, followed by questions regarding routines before (n = 28), during (n = 23), and after (n = 9) treatment, plus two additional questions, totalling 65 questions. RESULTS: Four dental hygienists and six dentists in 10 of the 12 C/Rs answered the questionnaire. Three C/Rs stated that they measure both the unstimulated and stimulated salivary secretion rate, and another C/R stated that they measure the stimulated secretion rate only. Similar recommendations were given regarding oral hygiene, salivary stimulants and substitutes, and extra fluoride. However, great variations were seen regarding recommendations for preventing and relieving oral mucositis. There were also discrepancies regarding information about the importance of avoiding smoking and alcohol. In seven C/Rs, patients visited the dental hygienist once a week during cancer treatment. CONCLUSION: The results suggests that there are great variations in odontological care given to patients undergoing treatment for cancer of the head and neck region in different county councils/regions in Sweden. There is a need to develop and implement evidence-based guidelines to decrease the risk of oral complications and increase both the quality of life and the quality of care.
Subject(s)
Dental Care/statistics & numerical data , Head and Neck Neoplasms/therapy , Mouth Diseases/diagnosis , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Dental Care/standards , Dental Hygienists/statistics & numerical data , Dentists/statistics & numerical data , Evidence-Based Dentistry/standards , Female , Head and Neck Neoplasms/complications , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Mouth Diseases/epidemiology , Mouth Diseases/etiology , Mouth Diseases/therapy , Oral Hygiene/education , Patient Education as Topic/standards , Patient Education as Topic/statistics & numerical data , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Practice Patterns, Dentists'/standards , Quality of Life , Radiotherapy/adverse effects , Risk Factors , Sex Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Sweden/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy-induced trismus (RTIT) is a debilitating condition without any proven effective treatment. This study investigates the effectiveness of prophylactic training to prevent RTIT during and up to 12 months after completed RT in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC), also investigating the incidence of RTIT. METHODS: Sixty-six consecutive patients from two RT clinics in Sweden were randomised into one of two groups: training with TheraBite(®) Jaw Motion Rehabilitation System(™) or a control group. Maximum interincisal openings (MIO) were recorded at baseline and once a week during treatment, three, six and 12 months after completed RT. Training frequency was recorded by patients in a log book. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in MIO between the intervention and control groups at any of the measurement points. Patients in both groups maintained their normal variation in MIO at 12 months after completed RT. A small group of patients in the control group had a 17% mean decrease in MIO by week 6 compared to baseline and improved their MIO by using the training programme. There was a significant mean difference in MIO from baseline to week 6 (3 mm, p = 0.018), and month 6 (2.7 mm, p = 0.040), for patients receiving 3D conformal radiotherapy. There was a significant difference in MIO between patients treated with RT and concurrent chemotherapy compared to patients with RT only at 12 months (p = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HNC undergoing high dose RT do not need to be burdened with an intense prophylactic training programme during RT and up to 12 months after completed RT. MIO measurements during RT and up to 12 months after completed RT are recommended to identify a small risk group who are an exception and may need a training programme.
