Clinician and consumer perceptions of head and neck cancer services in rural areas: Implications for speech pathology service delivery

Validity and Reliability of the Swedish Version of the Gugging Swallowing Screen for use in Acute Stroke Care

The purpose of this study was to cross-culturally validate the Swedish version of the Gugging Swallowing Screen (GUSS-S) for use in the acute phase of stroke. Further, to evaluate the inter-rater reliability between different healthcare professionals. GUSS was translated into Swedish using a forward-backward method followed by expert rating to obtain content validity. For criterion validity, the GUSS-S score was compared with Flexible Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES) assessed with the Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS) in acute stroke patients (≤ 96 h after stroke onset). Convergent validity was calculated by comparison with the Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS) as per the comprehensive FEES assessment, the Standardized Swallowing Assessment (SSA), and the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). To evaluate inter-rater reliability, a nurse and a speech-language pathologist (SLP) independently assessed 30 patients. In total, 80 patients (32 women, median age 77 years (range 29-93) were included, mean 1.7 ± 0.9 days after admission. With a cut-off value of 14 points, the GUSS-S identified aspiration with a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 73% (area under the curve: 0.87, 95% CI 0.78-0.95). Spearman rank correlation showed very strong correlation between the GUSS-S and PAS (rs=-0.718, P = < 0.001) and FOIS (rs=0.720, P = 0.001) and strong correlation between the GUSS-S and SSA (rs=0.545, P = < 0.001) and NIHSS (rs=-0.447, P = 0.001). The inter-rater agreement for GUSS-S was substantial (Kw=0.67, P = < 0.001). The results indicate that the GUSS-S is a valid and reliable tool for the assessment of dysphagia in acute stroke patients by different healthcare professionals.

Barriers and facilitators to cancer rehabilitation for patients with head and neck or lung cancer-a scoping review mapping structural and healthcare professionals' perspectives

PURPOSE

Rehabilitation can positively affect quality of life, functional status, and physiological status for patients with head and neck or lung cancer. However, barriers and facilitators regarding access, referral, and participation in rehabilitation have not been outlined in the literature either from a healthcare professional or from a structural perspective. Therefore, the objective of this paper was to identify and map barriers and facilitators from structural and healthcare professionals' perspectives in relation to access, referral, and participation in rehabilitation for patients with head and neck or lung cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two systematic searches were conducted in five databases mapping peer-reviewed research literature.

RESULTS

In total, 17 studies of 3918 potential sources were included. Seven themes were identified. Four themes concerned access: Understanding Patients' Resources; Collaboration Determining Access; Education, Knowledge, and Evidence Impact Access to Rehabilitation; and Resources Affecting Availability to Rehabilitation Services. Two themes concerned referral: Referral Criteria; and Elements Affecting Referral Pathway. One theme concerned participation: Factors Influencing Participation.

CONCLUSION

From structural and healthcare professionals' perspectives, barriers and facilitators impact access, referral and participation in rehabilitation. However, the findings on facilitators were limited; only one theme addressed participation and two findings concerned patients with low socioeconomic status.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONHealthcare professionals should be mindful that a diverse array of barriers and facilitators may impact the rehabilitation pathway for patients with head, neck, and lung cancer.Engagement by healthcare professionals and structural initiatives are needed to ensure comprehensive access to information concerning rehabilitation options.Local guidelines should be developed to prescribe methods for informing and guiding patients towards suitable rehabilitation options.It is important that healthcare professionals take the individual patient's resources into account when navigating aspects of access, referral, and participation in rehabilitation.

Survivorship Needs in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer in Regional, Rural and Remote Areas: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Understanding survivorship issues among people with head and neck cancer (HNC) is important as survival rates increase. Most research has focused on urban patients, leaving a gap in understanding the challenges faced by those in rural areas. This study aims to summarise the literature on survivorship needs for people with HNC in rural areas.

METHODS

PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, Medline, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Embase were searched from database inception to 10 July 2024, with no restriction on publication period, country, or language. Data on study aims, country, methodology, and major findings related to HNC survivors in rural areas were extracted. Study quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklists.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. Eight studies were qualitative, 11 were quantitative, and two adopted a mixed-methods approach. Results demonstrate the impact of complex treatments on physical (n = 13) and psychosocial (n = 14) functioning. This study also emphasises multifaceted challenges, including reduced access to specialised services, resulting in greater travel and financial burden, extending to caregivers. Hence, primary healthcare services are crucial in supporting these patients closer to home.

CONCLUSIONS

Addressing the gaps in equitable post-treatment care requires an even distribution of healthcare funding and workforce in rural areas. Future research could target these issues to develop tailored interventions or models of care, such as shared care, to ease access and financial burden.

The health care experiences of people with head and neck cancer: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Understanding health care experience in head and neck cancer (HNC) is becoming increasingly important due to changes in the disease profile, survivorship, and a greater appreciation of patient health care experience as an important outcome measure. People with HNC encounter many different types of health care professionals and health care touchpoints.

METHOD

Through systematic database searching, this scoping review of qualitative English-language studies describes the self-reported care experiences of those with HNC across the health care continuum, and describes the current state of the literature.

RESULTS

Overall, the 95 studies identified were heterogeneous and investigated a broad range of topics. Trends across studies showed research centered on hospital-based care, conducted in developed countries, with more studies on feeding than other aspects of care. Generic qualitative research frameworks, with individual interviews, were the preferred method of data collection.

CONCLUSION

Despite identifying many studies, there are significant gaps in our understanding of the HNC patient experience.

Enhancing speech-language pathology head and neck cancer service provision in rural Australia: Using a plan, do, study, act approach

PURPOSE

People with head and neck cancer (HNC) require ongoing speech-language pathology (SLP) services into the post-acute recovery phase of care. However, there are recognised service inequities/barriers for people from rural areas who are unable to access SLP services locally, necessitating travel to metropolitan centres. This study implemented strategies to assist rural speech-language pathologists to work to full scope of practice and support post-acute rehabilitation services for people with HNC.

METHOD

The study involved five SLP departments within a rural health referral network (one tertiary cancer centre, four rural sites). It involved a Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) method, across two six month cycles, to achieve implementation of a model to support local SLP delivery of HNC care. Data collected included service activity, consumer feedback from people accessing local care, staff perceptions of the model and changes to local SLP service capabilities.

RESULT

Staff identified four objectives for change across the two PDSA cycles including resource development, upskilling/training and improving communication, and handover processes. In cycle 1, multiple resources were developed such as an eLearning program for training and skill development. In cycle 2, a pilot trial of a shared-care model was implemented, which successfully supported a transfer of care to local services for eight people with HNC. The majority of consumers accessing HNC care locally were satisfied with the service and would recommend future people with HNC receive similar care.

CONCLUSION

The PDSA process supported development and implementation of a model enabling local speech-language pathologists to offer post-acute care for people with HNC. This model helps rural people with HNC to access care closer to home by supporting rural clinicians to work to full scope of practice.

Understanding workforce needs of allied health staff in regional cancer care centres: Informing recruitment and succession planning

OBJECTIVE

To describe: (1) the type and frequency of interventions undertaken by regional cancer specialist Allied Health Professionals (AHPs); and (2) regional generalist AHPs' exposure and confidence in undertaking these interventions.

DESIGN

Multiphase, observational study including a prospective study and a cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

Two regional Queensland Hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Cancer specialist AHPs (n = 13 in a prospective study; n = 7 in a cross-sectional survey) and generalist AHPs (n = 36 in a cross-sectional survey), across six disciplines from two regional hospitals and cancer services.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Phase 1: Frequency of cancer care AHP occasions of service and interventions. Phase 2: Current practice in cancer care AHP interventions; confidence; access to training, professional development and mentorship; barriers to working in cancer care, among cancer care and generalist AHPs.

RESULTS

Over 10-months, cancer care AHPs collectively delivered 12 393 interventions across 8850 occasions of service. Only four cancer care interventions were exclusively or predominantly carried out by cancer care AHPs-laryngectomy pre-operative counselling, laryngectomy rehabilitation and tracheostomy management (speech pathology) and lymphoedema management (physiotherapy). Generalist AHPs reported slightly lower confidence across all tasks if asked to carry out known interventions in a cancer setting compared with familiar settings. The primary perceived barrier to working in cancer care was lack of skills/experience/training reported by most CC AHPs, generalist Physiotherapists and Speech Pathologists, but not other generalist AHPs.

CONCLUSION

There was a significant overlap in interventions undertaken in the cancer care and generalist setting for AHPs. Appropriate on-boarding to contextualise interventions to cancer care is recommended to overcome reported lower confidence.