Quality of Life of the Patient with Head and Neck Cancer Submitted to Radiotherapy and the Overload of Their Caregivers

Decisional Conflict and Decision Regret in Head and Neck Oncology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance

Head and neck cancer (HNC) often requires treatment with a major impact on quality of life. Treatment decision-making is often challenging, as it involves balancing survival against the preservation of quality of life and choosing among treatments with comparable outcomes but variation in morbidity and adverse events; consequently, the potential for decisional conflict (DC) and decision regret (DR) is high.

Objectives

To summarize the literature on DC and DR in HNC, to give an overview of its prevalence and extent, and to advise on clinical practice and future research.

Data Sources

Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO were searched up to February 24, 2023, including all years of publication.

Study Selection

Eligible studies addressed DC and/or DR as primary or secondary outcomes with any instrument in HNC, except cutaneous tumors. Two mutually blinded researchers conducted screening and inclusion with support of an artificial intelligence assistant and conducted risk of bias (ROB) assessment.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed for data extraction. ROB assessments were done using Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (qualitative) and CLARITY (quantitative). Meta-analysis with a random-effects model was used to obtain pooled prevalence estimates for DC and DR when at least 4 sufficiently clinically homogeneous studies were available.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Prevalence of DC (qualitative, Decisional Conflict Scale, SURE questionnaire) and DR (qualitative, study-specific questionnaires, Decision Regret Scale, Shame and Stigma Scale).

Results

Overall, 28 studies were included, with 16 included in meta-analyses for DR prevalence. The pooled prevalence of clinically relevant DR above the cutoff score for validated questionnaires (11 studies; 2053 participants) was 71% (95% CI, 58%-82%; I2 = 94%), while for study-specific questionnaires (5 studies; 674 participants) it was 11% (95% CI, 5%-22%; I2 = 92%). Only 4 studies investigated DC, showing a prevalence of 22.6% to 47.5% above cutoff values. Derived overarching themes found in qualitative studies were preparation, shared decision-making roles, information, time pressure, stress of diagnosis, and consequences.

Conclusions and Relevance

Although limited data on DC and DR were available, the studies performed indicated that DC and DR are highly prevalent issues in HNC. Results suggest that study-specific questionnaires underestimated DR. The findings underscore the rationale to improve counseling and shared decision-making for this patient population.

Latent profiles of resilience and associations with quality of life in head and neck cancer patients undergoing proton and heavy ion therapy

Background

Psychological resilience is the most important psychological protection factor for cancer patients in the face of tumors and treatment. However, few studies have performed meaningful latent profile analyses of resilience to identify unobserved subgroups of head and neck cancer patients.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to investigate the characteristics of resilience in head and neck cancer patients using latent profile analysis (LPA) to determine the sociodemographic and disease characteristics of each profile. In particular, we examined the association of different resilience profiles with the quality of life of head and neck cancer patients.

Methods

A total of 254 head and neck cancer patients completed a demographic questionnaire, the Resilience Scale Specific to Cancer and the EOTRC QLQ-C3O, used to assess their resilience and quality of life.

Results

LPA identified three distinct profiles based on varying levels of resilience: "low resilience" group (n = 45; 17.72%), "moderate resilience" group (n = 113; 44.49%), and "high resilience" group (n = 96; 37.80%). Gender (χ2 = 6.20; p < 0.01), education level (χ2 = 1,812.59; p < 0.01), treatment regimen (χ2 = 6.32; p < 0.01), tumor stage (χ2 = 3.92; p ≤ 0.05), and initial recurrence (χ2 = 5.13; p < 0.05) were important predictors. High resilience was significantly related to higher quality of life (χ2 = 15.694; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Head and neck cancer patients' psychological resilience can be categorized as three resilience profiles; those who are female and have a low education level tend to have lower psychological resilience. Low resilience in patients is linked to poor role function and social function, low quality of life, and more severe pain symptoms, highlighting the need to address resilience in patient care for improved wellbeing.

Quality of Life vs. Supportive Care Needs for Oral Cancer Caregivers: Are They Related?

Caregivers providing care for their family members with oral cancer usually endure the caregiving burden in silence, which affects their quality of life and necessitates the need for supportive care. The aim of this study is to determine the relationship between the quality of life (QOL) of oral cancer caregivers and their supportive care needs (SCN) in Malaysia. The Malaysian versions of the Caregiver Oncology Quality of Life Questionnaire (M-CarGOQoL) and the Comprehensive Needs Assessment Tool for Cancer Caregivers (M-CNAT-C) were self-administered by 56 family caregivers of oral cancer patients from five tertiary hospitals throughout Peninsular Malaysia and Sarawak between October and December 2021. Correlation and multiple regression analyses were employed, and the significance level was set at p < 0.05. The mean score for the QOL of caregivers was 76.16 ± 16.01, with the lowest scores in the psychological well-being (64.87 ± 30.12) and self-esteem (68.64 ± 28.29) domains. The mean score for SCN of caregivers was 36.42 ± 24.16, with the highest scores in the healthcare staff (58.44 ± 33.80) and information (55.35 ± 29.98) domains. The correlation between QOL and SCN was moderately inversed, (r(54) = 0.58, p < 0.01). There was a significant effect of caregiving duration (<3 h/day versus >3 h/day) on the combined dependent variables (QOL and SCN), F(2, 53) = 5.006, p < 0.01, partial η² = 0.16. QOL and caregiving duration accounted for a significant 43% of SCN, R² = 0.43, adjusted R² = 0.41, F(2, 53) = 20.32, p < 0.01. In conclusion, oral cancer caregivers with poorer QOL have higher SCN. It is recommended that oral cancer caregivers be recognized by healthcare providers in order to deliver holistic patient care.

Validation of the Malay Version of the Shame and Stigma Scale among Cancer Patients in Malaysia

The assessment of stigma among cancer patients is of the utmost importance as stigma may lead to various psychological sequelae and a lower quality of life. This study aimed to translate the English version of the Shame and Stigma Scale (SSS) into Malay and validate the Malay version of the SSS (SSS-M) to assess the degree of stigma among cancer patients in Malaysia. Initially, the concurrent translation and back translation of the SSS-M were performed, and the face and content validity were assessed. Subsequently, the SSS-M was administered to a total of 234 patients with mixed types of cancer to assess its reliability (internal consistency and test-retest reliability), construct validity (convergent and discriminant validity), and conduct an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The SSS-M total score registered a good internal consistency (a Cronbach's α of 0.881) and test-retest reliability (an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.876, p < 0.001). The EFA and CFA confirmed that the SSS-M consisted of 16 items in 3 domains. Its convergent and discriminant validity were achieved. Hence, the SSS-M demonstrated good psychometric properties and is available for use to assess stigma among cancer patients in Malaysia.