Quality of life and its correlates in pretreatment patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer: A cross-sectional study in Thailand.

Background: Locally advanced head and neck cancer (LAHNC) can significantly impact the quality of life of patients in various ways. However, several factors can contribute to the decrease in quality of life. In Thailand, there is limited knowledge about the factors that affect the quality of life of patients with LAHNC before they receive treatment. Objective: This study aimed to examine the correlations between Palliative Performance Scale (PPS), family income, body mass index (BMI), age, comorbidity index, and the quality of life of patients with LAHNC before they undergo treatment. Methods: A correlational cross-sectional study was conducted, and data were collected from 94 pretreatment patients with LAHNC who were admitted to a cancer center in central Thailand using purposive sampling. The data collection instruments included a demographic data form, a medical record form, the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), the Palliative Performance Scale (PPS), and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck (FACT-H&N) version 4. Descriptive statistics, Pearson's correlation, and Spearman's rank correlation were used to analyze the data. Results: All study participants completed the questionnaire. The results showed that the overall quality of life of the patients was moderate. PPS, family income, and body mass index were moderately positively correlated with quality of life (r = 0.494, p <0.01; r = 0.420, p <0.01; r = 0.339, p <0.01, respectively). Age had a moderate negative correlation with quality of life (r = -0.596, p <0.01), while comorbidity was not significantly associated with quality of life. Conclusion: The quality of life of patients with LAHNC before treatment was associated with various factors, including PPS, family income, body mass index, and age. These findings highlight the importance of nutritional support before treatment and the need for social support, especially for older adult patients, to improve their quality of life. The results of this study can be valuable for nurses in developing care programs that enhance the quality of life for patients with LAHNC during the pretreatment phase.

Factors affecting patient access in Thailand: understanding delay in care seeking for patients with cancer.

While nearly three-quarters of cancer mortalities occur in low- and middle-income countries, we know little about the factors contributing to patient delays in seeking care for cancer. Our study employs a multifactorial approach by examining three key areas: patient socio-demographic factors, structural factors of health-care access and cancer patients' beliefs about their illness and cancer in general as potential determinants of their delay in seeking care in Thailand. We conducted a cross-sectional study using a systematic sample of 264 patients with cancer treated during 2006-2007 at Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn Cancer Centre, a hospital of the National Cancer Institute of Thailand. We defined patient delay as when a patient waited more than 3 months after symptom onset to seek medical care. We used bivariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression to examine unadjusted and adjusted associations of patient delays in seeking care with: patient socio-demographic factors, structural factors of health-care access and patients' beliefs about their illness in particular and about cancer in general. We also obtained patient self-reports about their reasons for delaying care. In multivariate analysis, only patient-belief factors were significantly associated with delay. Patients who believed that the primary causes of cancer were non-medical (vs. medical) were more likely to delay seeking care (adjusted odds ratio (OR)=4.37, 95% confidence interval (CI)=2.27-8.67). Patients who believed that cancer was probably curable or was curable (vs. incurable) were significantly less likely to delay seeking care (adjusted OR=0.2, 95% CI=0.08-0.56; adjusted OR=0.18, 95% CI=0.07-0.49, respectively). Patient socio-demographic factors and structural factors of health-care access were not significantly associated (p>0.05). Our findings suggest that interventions to reduce delays in care seeking should address patient beliefs regarding cancer in order to effectively mitigate barriers to access.

Comparison of ramosetron and granisetron for the prevention of acute and delayed emesis in Cisplatin-based chemotherapy: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: A clinical study of ramosetron was carried out to evaluate its efficacy in preventing both acute and delayed emesis in cisplatin-based chemotherapy by using a double-blind method with granisetron as the comparative drug. METHODS: Cisplatin at a dose of > or =70 mg/m(2) was administered as a single intravenous (i.v.) infusion over 4 h. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either ramosetron (0.3 mg i.v. bolus 30 min before cisplatin on Day 1 and a 0.1 mg tablet in the morning for Days 2 to 5 after completion of chemotherapy; n = 36) or granisetron (3 mg i.v. infusion 30 min before cisplatin on Day 1 and a 1 mg tablet in the morning for Days 2 to 5 after completion of chemotherapy; n = 37). The observation period started with the initiation of chemotherapy (0 h) and continued for 24 h after completion of the chemotherapy for acute emesis, and on Days 2 to 5 for delayed nausea and vomiting. RESULTS: A total of 73 patients were eligible for evaluation, with 36 patients in the ramosetron group and 37 in the granisetron group. The efficacy of both drugs was analyzed in terms of the degree of achievement in each day of treatment. Ramosetron was as effective as granisetron in preventing nausea and vomiting (both acute and delayed emesis). The two drugs had a similar safety profile and adverse events were generally mild and transient. CONCLUSIONS: Ramosetron is effective and safe for the control of acute and delayed emesis induced by cisplatin.