Validation of the Chinese version of the Head and Neck Patient Symptom Checklist for measuring nutrition impact symptoms during radiotherapy in patients with head and neck cancer

Swedish Translation and Cultural Adaptation of the Head and Neck Patient Symptom Checklist: An Instrument to Screen for Nutrition Impact Symptoms in Clinical Practice and Research

BACKGROUND

The Head and Neck Patient Symptom Checklist (HNSC) is a validated 2-part instrument used to ask patients with head and neck cancer about the nutrition impact symptoms they experience (part 1) and how these interfere with their eating (part 2).

PURPOSE

The purpose of this work was to translate and culturally adapt the HNSC into Swedish in accordance with the guidelines of the International Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR).

METHODS

The ISPOR guidelines include 10 steps, and these were thoroughly followed. In step 7, 9 health care professionals from the field of head and neck cancer assessed the perceived relevance (content validity) of each item in the HNSC, as well as the full HNSC. A total of 522 participants with head and neck cancer were included and followed up on 7 occasions using the HNSC to assess internal consistency.

RESULTS

The HNSC was translated from English into Swedish, ensuring accuracy through forward and backward translation and harmonization in the research team. Content validity for each part of the HNSC was rated excellent (scale content validity index 0.96). Internal consistency demonstrated a good Cronbach's alpha score (>0.8) across the 7 follow-up time points (from baseline [before the start of treatment] and up to 24 months posttreatment).

CONCLUSIONS

The HNSC has been successfully translated and culturally adapted into Swedish. The HNSC can be used in both clinical practice and research to screen for nutrition impact symptoms and symptoms that interfere with eating in patients with head and neck cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03343236 (date of registration: November 17, 2017).

Impact of various nutritional interventions on the physical and mental state of patients undergoing surgery for oral and maxillofacial tumor: guiding patients' informed choices

PURPOSE

To compare the effects of oral nutritional supplements (ONS), parenteral nutrition (PN), and enteral nutrition (EN) on the recovery of patients who underwent oral and maxillofacial surgery.

METHODS

The shared decision-making process assigned 37, 56, and 35 patients to the ONS, PN, and EN groups, respectively. Details such as demographic data, duration of hospitalization, cost of nutritional therapy, nutritional assessments, patients' satisfaction, and compliance, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) score, and relevant biochemical indices were systematically recorded and compared between the groups.

RESULTS

Patients with healthier biochemical indices and physical states at baseline, including a higher body mass index, preferred ONS. Patients using dentures and those with medical insurance often chose EN, while patients with recurrent disease preferred PN. Patients receiving EN had a similar duration of hospitalization to patients receiving ONS and also had the lowest nutritional costs. Patients receiving ONS had higher lymphocyte counts and levels of hemoglobin, albumin, and C-reactive protein. Patients in the PN group had elevated levels of serum potassium, chlorine, and sodium, while those receiving EN reported higher HAM-A scores, indicating greater anxiety than their counterparts. Predischarge surveys showed higher satisfaction and compliance in the PN and ONS groups than in the EN group. The PN group reported more adverse symptoms. At 7 days post-discharge, patients with EN reported a greater feeling of well-being.

CONCLUSION

ONS is the optimal choice for patients in good preoperative conditions, while PN is preferred during disease recurrence or when financially feasible. EN is suitable for patients using dentures or those with limited finances despite its potential psychological discomfort. Future studies with increased sample sizes and longer follow-up duration are necessary to corroborate our findings. The Trial Registration Number is ChiCTR2100049547. The date of registration is August 2, 2021.

Perioperative nutritional risk and its influencing factors in patients with oral cancer: a longitudinal study

Introduction

We aimed to investigate the nutritional risk status and dynamic changes in patients with perioperative oral cancer at different stages and analyze the factors influencing nutritional risk and the correlation among body mass index, nutrition-related symptoms, and nutritional risk.

Methods

In total, 198 patients with oral cancer who were hospitalized in the Head & Neck Surgery Departments of a tertiary cancer hospital in Hunan Province, China, from May 2020 to January 2021, were selected as participants. The Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 scale and Head and Neck Patient Symptom Checklist were used to assess patients on admission day, 7 days post-surgery, and 1 month post-discharge. Multivariate analysis of variance, paired t-test, and generalized estimating equation were used to analyze the trajectory and influencing factors of nutritional risk in patients with perioperative oral cancer. Spearman's correlation analysis was used to explore the correlation among body mass index, symptoms, and nutritional risk.

Results

The nutritional risk scores of patients with oral cancer at the three time points were 2.30 ± 0.84, 3.21 ± 0.94, and 2.11 ± 0.84, respectively, and the differences were significant (p < 0.05). The incidences of nutritional risk were 30.3, 52.5, and 37.9%, respectively. The factors influencing nutritional risk included education level, smoking status, clinical stage, flap repair, and tracheotomy (β = -0.326, 0.386, 0.387, 0.336, and 0.240, respectively, p < 0.05). Nutritional risk was negatively correlated with body mass index (rs = -0.455, p < 0.01) and positively correlated with pain, loss of appetite, sore mouth, bothersome smells, swallowing difficulty, taste changes, depression, chewing difficulty, thick saliva, and anxiety (rs = 0.252, 0.179, 0.269, 0.155, 0.252, 0.212, 0.244, 0.384, 0.260, and 0.157, respectively, p < 0.05).

Conclusion

The incidence of nutritional risk in patients with perioperative oral cancer was high, and the trajectory of nutritional risk changed over time. Strengthening the nutritional monitoring and management of postoperative patients or those with low education level, advanced-stage cancer, flap repair, tracheotomy, and low body mass index; strengthening tobacco control management; and controlling nutrition-related discomfort symptoms in perioperative oral cancer patients are necessary.

Predictive effect of pretreatment nutritional risk and GLIM-defined malnutrition on the nutrition impact symptom clusters in patients with head and neck cancer undergoing radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Evidence supporting predictive effects of pretreatment nutritional risk and nutritional status on nutrition impact symptom (NIS) clusters during radiotherapy in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) is insufficient.

METHODS

At baseline (T₁ ), we collected severity and interference of NIS (Head and Neck Patient Symptom Checklist), nutritional risk, and nutritional status. During (T₂ ) and at the end of radiotherapy (T₃ ), we re-evaluated NIS. Symptom clusters were identified by exploratory factor analysis using mean scores of NIS severity at T₂ and T₃ . Predictive effects were explored by generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

Five hundred thirty-seven patients were recruited and 334 of them completed. Four clusters were identified; the oropharyngeal symptom cluster was the most severe and had the greatest interference with diet. Patients with pretreatment nutritional risk or malnutrition experienced more severe oropharyngeal symptom cluster.

CONCLUSIONS

Pretreatment nutritional risk or malnutrition could predict the oropharyngeal symptom cluster in patients with HNC undergoing radiotherapy.

Fortified Snack Preferences among Patients with Cancer

Fortified snacks can increase nutrient intake among patients with cancer. The aim of this study was to identify snack foods preferred as potential vehicles for fortification and how experienced symptoms influence preferences.

A study-specific survey among 150 patients identified snack foods for fortification, influence of symptom presence, desired nutrients and characteristics of a fortified snack, and perception of oral nutritional supplements.

Patients had mainly breast, gastrointestinal, lung, and colorectal tumors. Soup, yogurt, cheese, fruit juice, egg products, and protein bars were identified as suitable fortified snacks by >60% of subjects. Desired characteristics for snacks included nutritious, flavorful, convenient, ready to eat, easy to chew, and easy to swallow. Vitamins, minerals, and protein were the nutrients of interest. Three clusters of symptoms were identified that predicted patients' desired characteristics of fortified snacks and satisfaction with food-related life. Patients in High and Moderate symptom clusters were more likely to have reduced food intake and higher consumption of oral nutritional supplements.

Preferences for fortified snacks and their characteristics are influenced by symptom presence. The results of this study provide insight to guide the development of fortified snacks for patients with cancer.

Nutrition Impact Symptom Clusters in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer Receiving Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to identify the nutrition impact symptom (NIS) clusters in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) and explore their relationships with the weight loss rate (WLR).

METHODS

This longitudinal study included 169 patients. At baseline (T₁), the demographics, clinical information, and weight before radiotherapy (RT) were recorded. At the third week (T₂) and the end of RT (T₃), we assessed the weight, prevalence, severity, and interference of the NIS with the Head and Neck Patient Symptom Checklist. The mean scores of the severity of NIS at T₂ and T₃ were used as a whole to perform the exploratory factor analysis and identify the symptom clusters. Cronbach's α coefficient was used to evaluate the internal consistency of the symptom clusters. Generalized estimating equations were used to analyze the relationships between clusters and the WLR.

RESULTS

We extracted three clusters from 14 NISs: the RT-specific symptom cluster including pain, difficulty swallowing, oral mucositis, thick saliva, difficulty chewing, and dry mouth (Cronbach's α = 0.820); the gastrointestinal symptom cluster including nausea, loss of appetite, feeling full, vomiting, and taste change (Cronbach's α = 0.592); the psychological status cluster including depressed, anxious, and lack of energy (Cronbach's α = 0.710). The multivariable model showed that participants with more serious RT-specific symptom cluster (β = 1.020, 95% CI: 0.570-1.471, P < 0.001) had higher WLR.

CONCLUSIONS

The NIS had close internal connections with each other, so the strategies applied by healthcare professionals should focus on multiple related symptoms, especially to manage the RT-specific symptom cluster.

Nutrition impact symptoms and weight loss in head and neck cancer during radiotherapy: a longitudinal study

OBJECTIVE

Patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) receiving radiotherapy (RT) are at high risk of weight loss (WL) due to a variety of nutrition impact symptoms (NIS). This study aimed to describe the NIS through the Head and Neck patient Symptom Checklist and body weight over time and further explore the impact of NIS on WL in patients with HNC undergoing RT.

METHODS

This was a prospective, longitudinal observational study. NIS and body weight of 117 participants were assessed at baseline, mid-treatment and post-treatment of RT. Generalised estimation equations (GEE) were used to conduct repeated measures analysis of NIS interference score and body weight at each time point and estimate the impact of NIS interference score on WL.

RESULTS

All participants experienced a substantial increase in the mean number of NIS during RT, with each patient having eight to nine NIS at mid-treatment and post-treatment. Marked increases were noted in almost each NIS score during RT. Compared with their baseline body weight, 97 (82.9%) and 111 (94.9%) participants experienced WL at mid-treatment and post-treatment, with the mean WL of 2.55±1.70 kg and 5.31±3.18 kg, respectively. NIS of dry mouth (β=-0.681, p=0.002, 95% CI -1.116 to -0.247), difficulty swallowing (β=-0.410, p=0.001, 95% CI -0.651 to -0.169) and taste change (β=-0.447, p=0.000, 95% CI -0.670 to -0.225) impacted WL significantly in GEE multivariate model.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HNC experience a variety of NIS which have significant impact on WL during RT. Assessment of NIS, especially dry mouth, difficulty swallowing and taste change, should be given more considerable attention in the supportive care of patients with HNC.