Abstract
This cross-sectional study was performed to examine sources of variation in distress
associated with altered appearance and fundamental functions in oral cancer patients
at 2 months, 12–15 months, 24–36 months, and ≥ 5 years post-definitive treatment.
Eligible patients completed six scales from the FACE-Q Head and Neck Cancer Module.
Pre-specified regression models were used to examine sources of variation in study
outcomes for 145 patients. Patient self-reports indicated that distress associated
with altered appearance and fundamental functions was highly variable, and distress
was present beyond 5 years post-definitive treatment in some patients. Associations
between distress scores and time post-definitive treatment, reconstructive surgery,
and adjuvant therapy were not statistically significant. There was, however, moderate
to strong evidence against the null hypothesis of no association between eating distress
scores and sex, primary cancer site, and T-stage; smiling distress scores and age
and primary cancer site; appearance distress scores and geographical remoteness and
primary cancer site; and speaking distress scores and primary cancer site. Primary
cancer site was the only significant independent predictor of multiple distress scores.
These findings suggest that predicting the psychological impact of oral cancer treatment
remains a challenge for the multidisciplinary team. Screening and interventions for
psychological distress are essential beyond the preoperative and acute care settings.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Longitudinal changes in the quality of life of oral cancer patients during the perioperative period.Int J Clin Oncol. 2018; 23: 1038-1045
- Health-related quality of life three years after diagnosis of head and neck cancer—a longitudinal study.Head Neck. 2001; 23: 113-125
- Quality of life in patients treated for cancer of the oral cavity requiring reconstruction: a prospective study.Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2008; 28: 120-125
- Assessment of quality of life in head and neck cancer patients.Head Neck. 1993; 15: 485-496
- Quality of life in head and neck cancer patients: validation of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire–H&N35.J Clin Oncol. 1999; 17: 1008-1019
- The Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck Cancer Patients and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Head and Neck Scale: a study of utility and validity.Cancer. 1996; 77: 2294-2301
- Long-term quality of life measured by the University of Washington QoL questionnaire (version 4) in patients with oral cancer treated with or without reconstruction with a microvascular free flap.Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018; 56: 475-481
- Prospective quality of life assessment between treatment groups for oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma.Head Neck. 2014; 36: 834-840
- Quality of life 2–10 years after combined treatment for advanced oral and oropharyngeal cancer.Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2002; 31: 664-669
- Health-related quality of life in oral cancer: a review.J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006; 64: 495-502
- Leveraging patient-reported outcomes data to inform oncology clinical decision making: introducing the FACE-Q Head and Neck Cancer Module.Cancer. 2019; 125: 863-872
- Age- and localization-dependent functional and psychosocial impairments and health related quality of life six months after OSCC therapy.Oral Oncol. 2018; 81: 61-68
- Identifying appearance-related concerns in routine follow-up clinics following treatment for oral and oropharyngeal cancer.Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012; 50: 314-320
- Assessment of problems with appearance, following surgery for oral and oro-pharyngeal cancer using the University of Washington appearance domain and the Derriford appearance scale.Oral Oncol. 2008; 44: 927-934
- National Safety and Quality Health Service Standards. 2nd ed. ACSOHC, Sydney2017
- Measuring health-related quality of life outcomes in head and neck reconstruction.Clin Plast Surg. 2013; 40: 341-349
- Measuring patient-reported outcomes in facial aesthetic patients: development of the FACE-Q.Facial Plast Surg. 2010; 26: 303-309
- Development and psychometric evaluation of the FACE-Q satisfaction with appearance scale: a new patient-reported outcome instrument for facial aesthetics patients.Clin Plast Surg. 2013; 40: 249-260
Australian Bureau of Statistics. The Australian Statistical Geography Standard (ASGS) Volume 5 - Remoteness Structure (cat no. 1270.0.55.005) https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/statistical-geography/australian-statistical-geography-standard-asgs [Accessibility verified January, 2023].
- Adjusting for multiple testing—when and how?.J Clin Epidemiol. 2001; 54: 343-349
- Health-related quality of life: a retrospective study on local vs. microvascular reconstruction in patients with oral cancer.BMC Oral Health. 2019; 19: 62
- Long-term quality of life and its predictive factors after oncologic surgery and microvascular reconstruction in patients with oral or oropharyngeal cancer.Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2014; 271: 801-807
- A systematic review of head and neck cancer quality of life assessment instruments.Oral Oncol. 2012; 48: 923-937
- Comparison of objective measures of trismus and salivation with patient-reported outcomes following treatment for head and neck cancer.JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2022; 148: 749-755
- Facial disfigurement and identity: a review of the literature and implications for facial transplantation.AMA J Ethics. 2018; 20: 309-323https://doi.org/10.1001/journalofethics.2018.20.4.peer1-1804
- Gender-specific differences concerning psychosocial aspects and functional impairments that influence quality of life in oral cancer treatment.Support Care Cancer. 2022; 30: 4905-4915
- Cancer in Australia 2021.Cancer series No. 133. Cat. No. CAN 144. AIHW, Canberra2021
- Invasive cancer incidence, 2004–2013, and deaths, 2006–2015, in nonmetropolitan and metropolitan counties—United States.MMWR Surveill Summ. 2017; 66: 1-13https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.ss6614a1
- Impact of demographics, tumor characteristics, and treatment factors on swallowing after (chemo) radiotherapy for head and neck cancer.Head Neck. 2010; 32: 513-528https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.21218
- Long-term swallowing after chemoradiotherapy: prospective study of functional and patient-reported changes over time.Head Neck. 2016; 38: E307-E315https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.23991
- Post-acute health care needs of people with head and neck cancer: mapping health care services, experiences, and the impact of rurality.Head Neck. 2022; 44: 1377-1392https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.27037
- Clinical Oncological Society of Australia. Psychosocial well-being and supportive care needs of cancer patients living in urban and rural/regional areas: a systematic review.Support Care Cancer. 2012; 20: 1-22https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-011-1270-1
Article info
Publication history
Published online: February 02, 2023
Accepted:
January 11,
2023
Publication stage
In Press Corrected ProofIdentification
Copyright
Crown Copyright © 2023 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of International Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. All rights reserved.
