4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Swallowing-related quality of life after head and neck cancer treatment

Journal

LARYNGOSCOPE
Volume 114, Issue 8, Pages 1362-1367

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1097/00005537-200408000-00008

Keywords

dysphagia; swallowing; MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory; chemoradiation; squamous cell carcinoma; outcomes

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: To determine the role of treatment modality in swallowing outcome after head and neck cancer treatment and to identify potential risk factors for posttreatment dysphagia. Study Design: Cross-sectional survey of patients with no evidence of disease 12 months or more after the treatment of a stage III or IV squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx, larynx, or hypopharynx. Methods: Potential subjects were stratified by tumor site and tumor T-stage to achieve a balanced comparison between chemoradiation (n = 18) and surgery/radiation (n = 22) groups. Outcome measures included a dysphagia risk factor survey, the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI), and the Short-Form 36 (SF-36). Results: Patients who received chemoradiation for oropharyngeal primaries demonstrated significantly better scores on the emotional (P = .03) and functional (P = .02) subscales of the MDADI than did patients who underwent surgery followed by radiation. There were no significant differences between chemoradiation and surgery/radiation groups for laryngeal and hypopharyngeal primaries. Additional risk factors for posttreatment dysphagia include prolonged (>2 weeks) nothing by mouth (NPO) status (P = .002) and low SF-36 Mental Health Subscale score (P = .002). Conclusion: The study suggests that chemoradiation may provide superior swallowing outcome to surgery/radiation in patients with oropharyngeal primary. Patients with depressed mental health and prolonged feeding tubes may be at higher risk of long-term dysphagia.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available