Identification and management of late dysfunction in survivors of head and neck cancer: Implementation and outcomes of an interdisciplinary quality of life (IQOL) clinic

Managing lymphoedema following treatment for head and neck cancer: is complete decongestive therapy an effective intervention to improve dysphagia outcomes?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to summarize current evidence regarding management of head and neck lymphoedema (HNL) to improve dysphagia outcomes following head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment. This review aims to support complete decongestive therapy (CDT) comprising compression, manual lymphatic drainage (MLD), exercises and skincare as an adjunct of dysphagia rehabilitation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Research in the limbs supports the use of CDT to improve lymphoedema outcomes. Emerging evidence supports the use of CDT for the head and neck, though, there is no consensus on optimal treatment required to improve dysphagia outcomes. Current evidence is limited due to a paucity of randomized controlled trials, case series or cohort studies with small participant numbers, and a lack of functional and instrumental dysphagia outcome measures. This provides a foundation to design and test an individually tailored programme of HNL intervention to evaluate swallowing outcomes post CDT.

SUMMARY

As the incidence of HNC is increasing with HPV, with patients living for longer with late effects of HNC treatment, it is vital to understand how the presence of HNL impacts on the swallow, and if functional dysphagia outcomes improve following treatment of HNL. Prospective, longitudinal research with objective and functional outcome measures are required to help determine optimal management of HNL and its impact on the swallow.

Implementing flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallow screening within annual cancer surveillance appointments to monitor for late-stage radiation-induced dysphagia: A feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Late-stage progressive decline of swallowing function after radiotherapy for head and neck cancer (HNC) is often difficult to monitor. This study examined the feasibility and clinical outcomes of speech-language pathology implementing flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallow (FEES) screening during annual cancer surveillance visits to monitor late-stage swallowing function.

METHODS

Patients >2 years post treatment who attended routine oncological visits underwent FEES screening. Feasibility (service data, stakeholder survey) and swallowing outcomes (oral intake, secretions, internal lymphedema, penetration-aspiration, and residue) were collected.

RESULTS

Screening was completed with 70% (50/71) of eligible patients. Medical staff and speech-language pathologists indicated the protocol was worthwhile and achievable to incorporate into practice. Almost all patients were willing to complete the protocol annually. FEES outcomes identified 84% with dysphagia versus only 26% self-reported dysphagia.

CONCLUSION

Findings indicate FEES screening incorporated into annual oncological reviews is feasible and effective at monitoring late-stage swallowing function following HNC.

Expert Consensus Statement: Management of Dysphagia in Head and Neck Cancer Patients

OBJECTIVE

To develop an expert consensus statement (ECS) on the management of dysphagia in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients to address controversies and offer opportunities for quality improvement. Dysphagia in HNC was defined as swallowing impairment in patients with cancers of the nasal cavity, paranasal sinuses, nasopharynx, oral cavity, oropharynx, larynx, or hypopharynx.

METHODS

Development group members with expertise in dysphagia followed established guidelines for developing ECS. A professional search strategist systematically reviewed the literature, and the best available evidence was used to compose consensus statements targeted at providers managing dysphagia in adult HNC populations. The development group prioritized topics where there was significant practice variation and topics that would improve the quality of HNC patient care if consensus were possible.

RESULTS

The development group identified 60 candidate consensus statements, based on 75 initial proposed topics and questions, that focused on addressing the following high yield topics: (1) risk factors, (2) screening, (3) evaluation, (4) prevention, (5) interventions, and (6) surveillance. After 2 iterations of the Delphi survey and the removal of duplicative statements, 48 statements met the standardized definition for consensus; 12 statements were designated as no consensus.

CONCLUSION

Expert consensus was achieved for 48 statements pertaining to risk factors, screening, evaluation, prevention, intervention, and surveillance for dysphagia in HNC patients. Clinicians can use these statements to improve quality of care, inform policy and protocols, and appreciate areas where there is no consensus. Future research, ideally randomized controlled trials, is warranted to address additional controversies related to dysphagia in HNC patients.