Patient preference for commonly‐used, head and neck cancer‐specific quality of life questionnaires in the follow‐up setting (Determin): A multi‐centre randomised controlled trial and mixed methods study

Author:

Mehanna Hisham1ORCID,Carter Ben23ORCID,Hartley Andrew14ORCID,Abou‐Foul Ahmad K.1ORCID,Brooks Jill1,Jones June1,Fresco Lydia5,Moss Laura6,Jones Terence M.7ORCID,Rogers Simon N.8ORCID,Morton Randall P.9ORCID,

Affiliation:

1. Institute of Head and Neck Studies and Education, School of Cancer Sciences, University of Birmingham Edgbaston Birmingham UK

2. King's Clinical Trials Unit (KCTU) Institute of Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience, King's College London De Crespigny Park London UK

3. Department of Biostatistics and Health Informatics Institute of Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience, King's College London De Crespigny Park London UK

4. Hall‐Edwards Radiotherapy Research Group University Hospitals Birmingham Edgbaston Birmingham UK

5. University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire Clifford Bridge Road Coventry UK

6. Velindre Cancer Centre Velindre Road Cardiff UK

7. Liverpool Head and Neck Centre University of Liverpool Liverpool UK

8. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Wirral University Teaching Hospital Wirral UK

9. Auckland University Auckland New Zealand

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundQuality of life (QoL) assessment forms an integral part of modern cancer care and research. The aim of this study is to determine patients' preferences and willingness to complete commonly used head‐and‐neck cancer (HNC) QoL questionnaires (QLQs) in routine follow‐up clinics.MethodsThis is a randomised control trial of 583 subjects from 17 centres during follow‐up after treatment for oral, oropharyngeal or laryngeal cancer. Subjects completed three structured validated questionnaires: EORTC QLQ‐HN35; FACT‐HN and UW‐QOL, and an unstructured patient‐generated list. The order of questionnaire presentation was randomised, and subjects were stratified by disease site and stage. Patients self‐rated the questionnaires they found most helpful to communicate their health concerns to their clinicians.ResultsOf the 558 respondents, 82% (457) found QLQs useful to communicate their health concerns to their clinician (OR = 15.76; 95% CI 10.83–22.94). Patients preferred the structured disease‐specific instruments (OR 8.79; 95% CI 5.99–12.91), while the open list was the most disliked (OR = 4.25; 95% CI 3.04–5.94). There was no difference in preference by treatment modality. More women preferred the FACT‐HN (OR = 3.01, 95% CI 1.05–8.62), and patients under 70 preferred EORTC QLQ‐HN35 (OR = 3.14, 95% CI 1.3–7.59). However, only 55% of patients expressed preference to complete questionnaires routinely at the clinic.ConclusionsMost patients found QLQs helpful during their follow‐up and 55% supported routine questionnaires in follow‐up clinics. Males and people over 70 years old were the least willing to complete the routine questionnaires and preferred shorter questionnaires (e.g., UW‐QOL). Women preferred FACT‐HN, and younger patients preferred EORTC QLQ‐HN35. Reasons for the reluctance to complete questionnaires require elucidation.

Funder

Macmillan Cancer Support

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Otorhinolaryngology

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. In reply to Mehanna H et al.;Clinical Otolaryngology;2023-06-20

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3