Implementing the National Institute of Clinical Excellence improving outcome guidelines for head and neck cancer: developing a business plan with reorganisation of head and neck cancer services

Value and Quality of Care in Head and Neck Oncology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The concept of value-based health care (VBHC) was articulated more than a decade ago. However, its clinical implementation remains an on-going process and a particularly demanding one for the domain of head and neck cancer (HNC). These cancers often present with fast growing tumors in functionally and cosmetically sensitive sites and afflict patients with differing circumstances and comorbidity. Moreover, the various treatment modalities and protocols have different effects on functional outcomes. Hence, the interpretation of what constitutes VBHC in head and neck oncology remains challenging.

RECENT FINDINGS

This monograph reviews developments in specific aspects of VBHC for HNC patients, including establishment of registries and quality indices (such as infrastructure, process, and outcome indicators). It emphasizes the importance of the multidisciplinary team, "time to treatment intervals," and adherence to guidelines. The discussion addresses major indicators including survival, quality of life and functional outcomes, and adverse events. Also, strengths and weaknesses of nomograms, prognostic and decision models, and variation of care warrant attention. Health care professionals, together with patients, must properly define quality and relevant outcomes, both for the individual patient as well as the HNC population. It is essential to capture and organize the relevant data so that they can be analyzed and the results used to improve both outcomes and value.

A retrospective analysis of hospital treatment expenditures among young and middle age patients with cancer, 2013-2017 under health reform

Under 60 year olds represent a rapidly growing segment of the cancer population. They often face longer hospital stays, higher treatment intensity, and hospitalization costs. In this background, we aim to assess the impact of the 2009 reforms on the hospital expenses of younger cancer inpatients. Our study sample included 11 791 young and middle age stomach, lung, colorectal, esophageal, and breast cancer inpatients hospitalized during 2013 to 2017. Hospitalization treatment costs of under 60 cancer inpatients increased, but it fell in 2017 under the impact of the health reforms. However, out-of-pocket expenditures rose, which partly reflected the failure of the health insurance scheme to adequately cover cancer inpatient cost, potentially imposing financial hardships on cancer inpatients and their families. To continue to reduce the economic burden of cancer patients, early screening and diagnosis among younger populations and enhanced hospice care integrated with the ongoing primary health care reform are important.

Gastrostomy versus nasogastric tube feeding for chemoradiation patients with head and neck cancer: the TUBE pilot RCT

BACKGROUND

Approximately 9000 new cases of head and neck squamous cell cancers (HNSCCs) are treated by the NHS each year. Chemoradiation therapy (CRT) is a commonly used treatment for advanced HNSCC. Approximately 90% of patients undergoing CRT require nutritional support via gastrostomy or nasogastric tube feeding. Long-term dysphagia following CRT is a primary concern for patients. The effect of enteral feeding routes on swallowing function is not well understood, and the two feeding methods have, to date (at the time of writing), not been compared. The aim of this pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) was to compare these two options.

METHODS

This was a mixed-methods multicentre study to establish the feasibility of a RCT comparing oral feeding plus pre-treatment gastrostomy with oral feeding plus as-required nasogastric tube feeding in patients with HNSCC. Patients were recruited from four tertiary centres treating cancer and randomised to the two arms of the study (using a 1 : 1 ratio). The eligibility criteria were patients with advanced-staged HNSCC who were suitable for primary CRT with curative intent and who presented with no swallowing problems.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the willingness to be randomised. A qualitative process evaluation was conducted alongside an economic modelling exercise. The criteria for progression to a Phase III trial were based on a hypothesised recruitment rate of at least 50%, collection of outcome measures in at least 80% of those recruited and an economic value-of-information analysis for cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

Of the 75 patients approached about the trial, only 17 consented to be randomised [0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13 to 0.32]. Among those who were randomised, the compliance rate was high (0.94, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.05). Retention rates were high at completion of treatment (0.94, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.05), at the 3-month follow-up (0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.04) and at the 6-month follow-up (0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.04). No serious adverse events were recorded in relation to the trial. The qualitative substudy identified several factors that had an impact on recruitment, many of which are amenable to change. These included organisational factors, changing cancer treatments and patient and clinician preferences. A key reason for the differential recruitment between sites was the degree to which the multidisciplinary team gave a consistent demonstration of equipoise at all patient interactions at which supplementary feeding was discussed. An exploratory economic model generated from published evidence and expert opinion suggests that, over the 6-month model time horizon, pre-treatment gastrostomy tube feeding is not a cost-effective option, although this should be interpreted with caution and we recommend that this should not form the basis for policy. The economic value-of-information analysis indicates that additional research to eliminate uncertainty around model parameters is highly likely to be cost-effective.

STUDY LIMITATIONS

The recruitment issues identified for this cohort may not be applicable to other populations undergoing CRT. There remains substantial uncertainty in the economic evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

The trial did not meet one of the three criteria for progression, as the recruitment rate was lower than hypothesised. Once patients were recruited to the trial, compliance and retention in the trial were both high. The implementation of organisational and operational measures can increase the numbers recruited. The economic analysis suggests that further research in this area is likely to be cost-effective.

FUTURE WORK

The implementation of organisational and operational measures can increase recruitment. The appropriate research question and design of a future study needs to be identified. More work is needed to understand the experiences of nasogastric tube feeding in patients undergoing CRT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN48569216.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 16. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Swallowing beyond six years post (chemo)radiotherapy for head and neck cancer; a cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this prospective study is to report on long-term swallowing outcomes in a group of head and neck cancer patients following (chemo) radiotherapy treatment, assess for changes over time and identify any predictor variables of outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

42 survivors were assessed on four swallowing measures and followed up from pre-treatment to six years post 3D (chemo) radiotherapy. Measures included a swallowing specific QOL questionnaire, penetration-aspiration scale, dietary restrictions and a timed water swallow test.

RESULTS

At six years, 71% reported swallowing difficulties on the questionnaire. One fifth of patients had aspiration, with a raised risk of chest infection. Seven percent required a laryngectomy for a dysfunctional larynx. Despite this, half the group reported having a normal diet. There was variation in the pattern of change between one and six years. A significant deterioration was only observed in the timed water swallow test (p < 0.0001). Larger radiotherapy volume predicted this outcome. None of the variables tested predicted outcome for the other three swallow measures.

CONCLUSION

Patients continue to report swallowing difficulties at six years, with a proportion having persistent aspiration. Further work on identifying the risk factors associated with aspiration tolerance, aspiration pneumonia, prevention and management is warranted. Long-term dysphagia remains a significant and serious concern following (chemo) radiotherapy for HNC and swallowing outcomes should continue to be monitored over time.

A feasibility study incorporating a pilot randomised controlled trial of oral feeding plus pre-treatment gastrostomy tube versus oral feeding plus as-needed nasogastric tube feeding in patients undergoing chemoradiation for head and neck cancer (TUBE trial): study protocol

BACKGROUND

There are 7000 new cases of head and neck squamous cell cancers (HNSCC) treated by the NHS each year. Stage III and IV HNSCC can be treated non-surgically by radio therapy (RT) or chemoradiation therapy (CRT). CRT can affect eating and drinking through a range of side effects with 90 % of patients undergoing this treatment requiring nutritional support via gastrostomy (G) or nasogastric (NG) tube feeding. Long-term dysphagia following CRT is a primary concern for patients. The effect of enteral feeding routes on swallowing function is not well understood, and the two feeding methods have, to date, not been compared to assess which leads to a better patient outcome. The purpose of this study is to explore the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing these two options with particular emphasis on patient willingness to be randomised and clinician willingness to approach eligible patients.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a mixed methods multicentre study to establish the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial comparing oral feeding plus pre-treatment gastrostomy versus oral feeding plus as required nasogastric tube feeding in patients with HNSCC. A total of 60 participants will be randomised to the two arms of the study (1:1 ratio). The primary outcome of feasibility is a composite of recruitment (willingness to randomise and be randomised) and retention. A qualitative process evaluation investigating patient, family and friends and staff experiences of trial participation will also be conducted alongside an economic modelling exercise to synthesise available evidence and provide estimates of cost-effectiveness and value of information. Participants will be assessed at baseline (pre-randomisation), during CRT weekly, 3 months and 6 months.

DISCUSSION

Clinicians are in equipoise over the enteral feeding options for patients being treated with CRT. Swallowing outcomes have been identified as a top priority for patients following treatment and this trial would inform a future larger scale RCT in this area to inform best practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN48569216.

Defining value-driven care in head and neck oncology

In the USA, increasing attention is being paid to adopting a value-based framework for measuring and ultimately improving health care delivery. Value is defined as the benefit achieved relative to costs. The numerator of the value equation includes quality of care and outcomes achieved. The denominator includes costs, both financial costs and harms of treatment. Herein, we describe these elements of value as they pertain to head and neck cancer. A particular focus is to identify areas of the value equation where physicians have some control. We examine quality in each of three dimensions: structure, process, and outcomes. We also adopt Porter's three-tiered hierarchy of outcomes model, with specific outcomes relevant to patients with head and neck and thyroid cancer. Finally, we review issues related to costs and harms. We believe these findings can serve as a framework for further efforts to drive value-based delivery of head and neck cancer care.

Economic burden of resected squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in an incident cohort of patients in the UK

BACKGROUND

SCCHN is the sixth most common cancer worldwide. Locally advanced SCCHN continues to be a therapeutic challenge with high rates of morbidity and mortality and a low cure rate. Despite the apparent impact of SCCHN on patients and presumably society, the economic burden of the treatment of resected SCCHN patients in the UK has not been investigated.

METHODS

This retrospective data analysis was based on in- and outpatient care records extracted from Hospital Episode Statistic database and linked to mortality data in the UK. SCCHN patients with resection of lip, tongue, oral cavity, pharynx or larynx were followed for at least one year (max. of 5 years) from the date of first resection.

RESULTS

A total of 11,403 patients (mean age 63.2 years, 69.8% males) who met study criteria were followed for an average of 31 months. 32.3% of patients died in the follow-up period and the mean time to death was 16.9 months. In the first year, mean number of days of hospitalization and number of outpatient visits was 21.6 and 4.2, respectively; mean number of reconstructive and secondary surgeries was 0.32 and 0.14 per patient, respectively; 4.7% of the patients received radiotherapy and 12.2% received chemotherapy. From the second to fifth year healthcare utilizations rates were lower. Mean cost of post-operative healthcare utilization was £23,212 over 5 years (£19,778 for the first year and £1477, £847, £653 and £455 for years 2-5). Total cost of post-operative healthcare utilisation was estimated to be £255.5 million over the 5-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

In the UK, SCCHN patients after surgical resection needed considerable healthcare resources and incurred substantial costs. Study findings might provide a useful source for clinicians and decision makers in understanding the economic burden of managing SCCHN in the UK and also suggests a need for new therapies that could improve outcomes and reduce the disease burden.

Quality of care in head and neck cancer

Improving the quality of health care has become a national priority, as indicated by the establishment of multiple federal initiatives and by the actions of national medical societies and the American Board of Medical Specialties. Health care can be assessed in each of three dimensions: structure, process, and outcomes. Here we review recent efforts to evaluate the quality of care delivered to head and neck cancer patients and to develop methods for improvement and continual assessment, with a particular emphasis on the evaluation of process of care.

The use of examination under anaesthesia and panendoscopy in patients presenting with oral cavity and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Although examination under anaesthesia and panendoscopy (EUAP) has traditionally been used in the assessment of patients presenting with oral cavity and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), the era of modern medicine with its advanced imaging techniques has meant that the indications for this technique have potentially reduced.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

In an attempt to quantify the current use of EUAP in the UK, a structured telephone questionnaire was undertaken of 50 maxillofacial units. Information was gathered regarding whether the technique was adopted on a routine or selective basis. Likewise perceived disadvantages were sought.

RESULTS

Twenty-two units (44%) carried out EUAP on all patients presenting with oral cavity and oropharyngeal SCC. Of the remaining 28 units, all employed EUAP on a selective basis, the most commonly for the assessment of the primary tumour. The most common perceived disadvantage of carrying out EUAP routinely was its potential to increase the waiting time to definitive treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest a gradual move towards the selective use of EUAP in patients presenting with oral cavity and oropharyngeal SCC.

A multidisciplinary audit of clinical coding accuracy in otolaryngology: financial, managerial and clinical governance considerations under payment-by-results

OBJECTIVES

To audit the accuracy of otolaryngology clinical coding and identify ways of improving it.

DESIGN

Prospective multidisciplinary audit, using the 'national standard clinical coding audit' methodology supplemented by 'double-reading and arbitration'.

SETTINGS

Teaching-hospital otolaryngology and clinical coding departments.

PARTICIPANTS

Otolaryngology inpatient and day-surgery cases.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Concordance between initial coding performed by a coder (first cycle) and final coding by a clinician-coder multidisciplinary team (MDT; second cycle) for primary and secondary diagnoses and procedures, and Health Resource Groupings (HRG) assignment.

RESULTS

1250 randomly-selected cases were studied. Coding errors occurred in 24.1% of cases (301/1250). The clinician-coder MDT reassigned 48 primary diagnoses and 186 primary procedures and identified a further 209 initially-missed secondary diagnoses and procedures. In 203 cases, patient's initial HRG changed. Incorrect coding caused an average revenue loss of 174.90 pounds per patient (14.7%) of which 60% of the total income variance was due to miscoding of a eight highly-complex head and neck cancer cases. The 'HRG drift' created the appearance of disproportionate resource utilisation when treating 'simple' cases. At our institution the total cost of maintaining a clinician-coder MDT was 4.8 times lower than the income regained through the double-reading process.

CONCLUSIONS

This large audit of otolaryngology practice identifies a large degree of error in coding on discharge. This leads to significant loss of departmental revenue, and given that the same data is used for benchmarking and for making decisions about resource allocation, it distorts the picture of clinical practice. These can be rectified through implementing a cost-effective clinician-coder double-reading multidisciplinary team as part of a data-assurance clinical governance framework which we recommend should be established in hospitals.