The PRO-ACTIVE trial protocol: a randomized study comparing the effectiveness of PROphylACTic swallow InterVEntion for patients receiving radiotherapy for head and neck cancer

Impact of Patient Factors on Attendance at Remote Telehealth Swallow Therapy

In-person swallow therapy is a primary and effective treatment for dysphagia. However, remote telehealth is now a widely utilized component of healthcare delivery for therapeutic interventions. This study evaluates potential factors influencing attendance at telehealth swallow therapy. Retrospective review of 308 patients referred for telehealth swallow therapy from April 2020-November 2021 included patient referral diagnosis, diagnostic swallowing evaluations, and sociodemographic information including age, race, health insurance, interpreter use, and socioeconomic status. Univariable and multivariable analyses compared patient and appointment factors for those who attended telehealth swallow therapy with those who did not attend. Overall, 71.8% of patients attended at least one telehealth swallow therapy appointment while 28.2% did not attend any. The most common referral diagnoses were "Cancer" (19.2%) and "Dysphagia Unspecified" (19.2%). Patients diagnosed with "Cancer" and "Muscle Tension" were significantly less likely to attend telehealth swallow therapy compared to those with "Dysphagia Unspecified," "Globus," and "Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease/Laryngopharyngeal Reflux" after adjusting for covariates. Lower socioeconomic status (p = 0.023), no interpreter use (p < 0.001), and more diagnostic evaluations (p = 0.001) correlated with higher telehealth swallow therapy attendance. Race and sex did not correlate with attendance. Most patients referred to telehealth swallow therapy attended at least one appointment. Patients with dysphagia associated with cancer and muscle tension, those with higher socioeconomic status, interpreter use, and fewer diagnostic swallowing evaluations were less likely to attend telehealth swallow therapy. Future research should investigate and compare attendance and efficacy of telehealth swallow therapy with in-person therapy.

Exploring the Acceptability of Behavioral Swallowing Interventions for Head and Neck Cancer Patients During Radiotherapy: A Qualitative Study of Patients' Experience

The PRO-ACTIVE randomized clinical trial offers 3 swallowing therapies to Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) patients during radiotherapy namely: reactive, proactive low- ("EAT-RT" only), and high-intensity ("EAT-RT + exercises"). Understanding the perceived acceptability of these interventions is important to inform eventual implementation into clinical practice. This study explored patients' perspectives using qualitative methodology. At 2 Canadian PRO-ACTIVE trial sites, 24 trial participants were recruited for individual semi-structured interviews, representing each of the 3 trial arms. Data collection and thematic analysis were guided by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). Member checking was conducted through follow-up focus groups. Seven themes were derived reflecting the TFA constructs. Overall, regardless of trial arm, patients reported a positive experience with therapy. Patients identified benefits of EAT-RT therapy, reporting that it provided meaningful feedback on diet progress and supported goal setting for oral intake. Patients who received proactive therapies valued the opportunity to set expectations early, build mealtime routine iteratively over time, and have an extended engagement with the SLP. Regardless of trial arm, patients agreed proactive therapy aligned with what they think is best and that therapy intensity should accommodate individual needs. This study identified the value to HNC patients of receiving swallowing interventions during RT and setting realistic expectations around swallowing. Compared to reactive care, proactive therapies were perceived helpful in consolidating habits early, establishing realistic expectations around swallowing and building an extended rapport with the SLP. These findings will inform the implementation of proactive versus reactive swallowing therapies in clinical practice.

Post-Radiotherapy Dysphagia in Head and Neck Cancer: Current Management by Speech-Language Pathologists

OPINION STATEMENT

Dysphagia, difficulty in eating and drinking, remains the most common side effect of radiotherapy treatment for head and neck cancer (HNC) with devastating consequences for function and quality of life (QOL). Over the past decade, 5-year survival has improved due to multiple factors including treatment advances, reduction in smoking, introduction of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine and more favourable prognosis of HPV-related cancers. Increased prevalence of HPV-positive disease, which tends to affect younger individuals, has led to an elevated number of people living for longer with the sequelae of cancer and its treatment. Symptoms are compounded by late effects of radiotherapy which may lead to worsening of dysphagia for some long-term survivors or new-onset dysphagia for others. Speech-language pathology (SLP) input remains core to the assessment and management of dysphagia following HNC treatment. In this article, we present current SLP management of dysphagia post-radiotherapy. We discuss conventional treatment approaches, the emergence of therapy adjuncts and current service delivery models. The impact of adherence on therapy outcomes is highlighted. Despite treatment advancements, patients continue to present with dysphagia which is resistant to existing intervention approaches. There is wide variation in treatment programmes, with a paucity of evidence to support optimal type, timing and intensity of treatment. We discuss the need for further research, including exploration of the impact of radiotherapy on the central nervous system (CNS), the link between sarcopenia and radiotherapy-induced dysphagia and the benefits of visual biofeedback in rehabilitation.

The Acceptability of Behavioural Swallowing Interventions for Head and Neck Cancer Patients During Radiotherapy: A Qualitative Study Exploring Experiences of Clinical Trial Speech-Language Pathologists

The PRO-ACTIVE randomized clinical trial offers 3 swallowing therapies to Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) patients during radiotherapy (RT) namely: reactive, proactive low- ("EAT-RT" only) and high-intensity ("EAT-RT + exercises"). Understanding the experiences of the trial Speech-Language Pathologists (SLPs) will be useful to inform clinical implementation. This study assessed SLP opinions of acceptability and clinical feasibility of the 3 trial therapies. 8 SLPs from 3 Canadian PRO-ACTIVE trial sites participated in individual interviews. Using a qualitative approach, data collection and thematic analysis were guided by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. Member checking was conducted through a follow-up focus group with willing participants. Seven themes were derived: intervention coherence, burden, barriers/facilitators, self-efficacy, attitude, ethicality, and perceived effectiveness. SLPs felt all 3 therapies had potential benefit yet perceived more advantages of proactive therapies compared to reactive. Compared to exercises, SLPs particularly endorsed the EAT-RT component. A major barrier was keeping patients motivated, which was impacted by acute toxicity and sometimes conflicting instructions from the healthcare team. Strategies utilized by to overcome barriers included: scaling exercises and/or diet up/down according to the changing patient needs and communicating therapy goals with healthcare team. A model was derived describing the perceived acceptability of the swallowing therapies according to SLPs, based on the interconnection of main themes. Proactive therapies were perceived as more acceptable to trial SLPs, for facilitating patient engagement. The perceived acceptability of the swallowing therapies was related to seven interconnected aspects of providers' experience. These findings will inform the implementation and potential uptake of the PRO-ACTIVE swallowing therapies in clinical practice.

Prehabilitation for Patients with Cancer Undergoing Radiation Therapy: a Scoping Review

AIMS

Prehabilitation is a process of identifying and assessing factors that could compromise the physical and psychological health of patients undergoing cancer treatment and implementing an intervention to combat such concerns. The use of prehabilitation in cancer surgery has yielded positive outcomes in rectal, lung and abdominal cancers. Prehabilitation strategies have potential to improve the management of patients receiving radiation therapy or chemoradiation. The aim of the present study was to map the evidence of the assessment and evaluation of prehabilitation for radiation therapy patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A database search using EMBASE and PubMed was conducted. The PRISMA guidelines were adhered to. Keywords included prehabilitation, radiation therapy/radiotherapy, chemoradiotherapy/chemoradiation, intervention and exercise. Types of prehabilitation strategy, their purposes and impact, according to cancer site, were analysed.

RESULTS

Prehabilitation is most commonly evaluated in head and neck cancer, whereby unimodal, physical interventions manage dysphagia. Prehabilitation for lung cancer demonstrated its ability to widen treatment options for patients. Physical prehabilitation is administered to combat adverse effects of neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy in patients with rectal cancer.

CONCLUSION

Prehabilitation is adaptive and tailored to specific patient and site needs; thus it is applied across a wide range of cancer sites. More interventions by which radiation therapy is the definitive treatment modality and larger sample sizes within these studies are warranted to increase prehabilitation utilisation for patients undergoing radiation therapy.

Assessment of patients with head and neck cancer using the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory: Results of a study into its comprehensiveness, comprehensibility and relevance to clinical practice

BACKGROUND

The MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) is a widely used patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) which assesses dysphagia-related quality of life (QoL) in head and neck cancer (HNC). Despite its common use in HNC research and clinical practice, few of its psychometric properties have been reappraised since its inception. The aim of this study was to perform a survey-based qualitative analysis of UK HNC clinicians' perceptions of the content validity of the MDADI, evaluating it across the parameters of relevance, comprehensiveness and comprehensibility as per the COSMIN guideline for PROM assessment.

RESULTS

Four themes relating to the content validity of the MDADI were identified: (1) MDADI items lack clarity of definition of the terms 'swallowing', 'eating' and 'dysphagia'; (2) the MDADI is perceived to be overly negative in tone including items that service users may find distressing or disempowering; (3) items in the tool are exclusory to specific subgroups of patients, such as those who are nil by mouth or socially isolated; and (4) modifications to the MDADI were suggested and encouraged to make it more clinically useful and patient-centred.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that MDADI's content validity is 'insufficient' when rated by COSMIN parameters. This has significant implications for its continued use in HNC research and clinical practice. Further re-evaluation of the content validity of the MDADI is warranted, with potential future amendment of items being indicated if the results of this study are corroborated in subsequent research.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject The MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) patient-reported outcome measure of dysphagia-related quality of life is widely used in clinical practice and international clinical trials. Content validity is considered to be the most important property of a tool when assessing its psychometric strengths and weaknesses; however, the MDADI's content validity has not been reappraised since its initial development. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study presents UK speech and language therapists' opinions and experience of the content validity of the MDADI and this first reappraisal of its content validity since its initial development highlights several issues with this psychometric parameter of the tool. This study highlights that further re-evaluation of the content validity of the MDADI is warranted, with potential future amendment of items being indicated if the results of this study are corroborated in subsequent research. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Clinicians cannot assume that commonly used outcomes tools have strong psychometric profiles. Consideration of the content validity of outcomes tools during selection for use in clinical and research practice should be key, as this will encourage use of tools that produce relevant, valid data that can contribute meaningfully to patient-centred care.

Digital health in head and neck cancer: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Digital health tools are increasingly being recognised as effective interventions in monitoring chronic health conditions. This systematic review addressed how digital health is currently utilised in patients with head and neck cancer as an adjunct to care.

METHOD

Studies of the development or evaluation of an eHealth, telemedicine or telemonitoring tool were eligible. A narrative synthesis was performed as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies of digital health tools in head and neck cancer were identified. Nine were randomised, controlled trials but most had concern of bias. Fourteen (48 per cent) of the interventions used multiple modes of delivery. The primary digital tool functions are symptom tracking and self-care, prehabilitation and rehabilitation, psychological support, and education, including decision aids. Most tools aimed to support patients during active cancer treatment.

CONCLUSION

There are a small number of digital health tools for head and neck cancer patients; however, there is a lack of well-designed randomised, controlled trials to demonstrate effectiveness.

Adherence to swallowing recommendations during (chemo)radiotherapy in head and neck cancer survivors: a scoping review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There is a paucity of knowledge regarding patient adherence to dysphagia recommendations. It is recognized that unique barriers and facilitators contribute to poor treatment adherence in head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors. This review aims to identify the key themes and knowledge gaps regarding adherence to swallowing recommendations in HNC survivors during (chemo)radiotherapy (C)RT.

RECENT FINDINGS

Seven studies were identified. Six facilitators to adherence were extracted, namely pain relief, behavioural intervention, attendance at multidisciplinary clinic, individualised swallowing therapy, absence of prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastronomy (PEG) and positive social control from a spouse. Barriers to adherence included pain, depression and presence of prophylactic PEG. Adherence to swallowing recommendations positively impacted swallowing outcomes in one study.

SUMMARY

Little is known about adherence to swallowing recommendations during (C)RT in HNC survivors. Capturing adherence is challenging. Several knowledge gaps were identified. Further research is needed to better understand the barriers and facilitators from the survivors' perspective. This will inform development of best practice regarding how swallowing recommendations are provided to promote adherence and improve outcomes.

Dysphagia Advances in Head and Neck Cancer

Purpose of Review

This review summarises the current literature regarding head and neck cancer-associated dysphagia. Up-to-date evidence for dysphagia outcome measurement for this population is provided, in addition to recent innovations that aim to prevent, reduce or remediate the common and debilitating side effects of treatment.

Recent Findings

Both patient-reported outcomes and clinical measures are necessary to capture the multi-dimensional nature of swallowing. A minimally important difference in scores has been calculated for some of these measures, to aid interpretation and powering of clinical trials. The number of dysphagia-related trials has increased, predominantly investigating optimal treatment for oropharyngeal HPV-positive disease, and speech and language pathology interventions using an impairment-based approach.

Summary

Although substantial progress has been made, further work is necessary to establish a consensus over outcome measures. Modifying treatments may improve outcomes. Several trials are underway to establish the effectiveness of speech and language pathology dysphagia interventions.

Adhering to Eat and Exercise Status During Radiotherapy for Oropharyngeal Cancer for Prevention and Mitigation of Radiotherapy-Associated Dysphagia

Importance

Previously published work reported independent benefit of maintenance of oral intake (eat) and swallowing exercise adherence (exercise) during radiotherapy (RT) on diet and functional outcomes. The current study seeks to validate the authors' previously published findings in a large contemporary cohort of patients with oropharynx cancer (OPC) and address limitations of the prior retrospective study using prospective, validated outcome measures.

Objective

To examine the longitudinal association of oral intake and swallowing exercise using validated, clinician-graded and patient-reported outcomes.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Secondary analysis of a prospective OPC registry including patients who underwent primary RT/chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or primary transoral robotic surgery plus RT/CRT for OPC at a single-institution comprehensive cancer center.

Exposures

Adherence to speech pathology swallowing intervention during RT coded as (1) eat: oral intake at end of RT (nothing by mouth [NPO]; partial oral intake [PO], with feeding tube [FT] supplement; full PO); and (2) exercise: swallowing exercise adherence (nonadherent vs partial/full adherence).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Feeding tube and diet (Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck Cancer) patient-reported swallowing-related quality of life (MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory; MDADI) and clinician-graded dysphagia severity grade (videofluoroscopic Dynamic Imaging Grade of Swallowing Toxicity; DIGEST) were collected at baseline, 3 to 6 months, and 18 to 24 months post-RT.

Results

A total of 595 patients (mean [SD] age, 65 [10] years; 532 [89%] male) who underwent primary RT (111 of 595 [19%]), CRT (434 of 595 [73%]), or primary transoral robotic surgery plus RT/CRT (50 of 595 [8%]) were included in this cohort study. At the end of RT, 55 (9%) patients were NPO, 115 (19%) were partial PO, 425 (71%) were full PO, and 340 (57%) reported exercise adherence. After multivariate adjustment, subacute return to solid diet and FT were independently associated with oral intake (odds ratio [OR], 2.0; 95% CI, 1.0-4.1; OR, 0.1; 95% CI, 0.0-0.2, respectively) and exercise (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.9-4.5; OR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1-0.5, respectively). Subacute MDADI (β = 6.5; 95% CI, 1.8-11.2), FT duration (days; β = -123.4; 95% CI, -148.5 to -98.4), and less severe dysphagia per DIGEST (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.3-1.0) were independently associated with oral intake, while exercise was independently associated with less severe laryngeal penetration/aspiration per DIGEST-safety (OR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.4-1.0). DIGEST grade associations with oral intake were not preserved long-term; however, exercise was associated with a higher likelihood of solid diet intake and better swallow safety per DIGEST.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this cohort study extend the authors' previously published findings that oral intake and swallowing exercise during RT are associated with favorable functional outcomes, now demonstrated with broader domains of function using validated measures. Patterns of benefit differed in this study. Specifically, better subacute recovery of swallow-related quality of life and less severe dysphagia were found among patients who maintained oral intake independent of exercise adherence, and shorter FT utilization and better long-term diet and swallowing safety were found among those who exercised independent of oral intake.

Exploring patient experiences with a telehealth approach for the PRO-ACTIVE trial intervention in head and neck cancer patients

INTRODUCTION

Following the COVID-19 directive to cease non-essential services, a rapid shift was made in the delivery of Speech Language Pathology (SLP) dysphagia management in the 3-arm, randomized PRO-ACTIVE trial. To inform future programs, this study explored patients' experiences with telehealth when the planned in-person SLP intervention was moved to a telehealth modality.

METHODS

A theory-guided qualitative descriptive approach was used. Willing participants who had received at least one telehealth swallowing therapy session participated in a one-time semi-structured interview. Interview transcripts were subjected to a standard qualitative content/theme analysis. Researchers reviewed all transcripts and used a multi-step analysis process to build a coding framework through consensus discussion. Summaries and key messages were generated for each code.

RESULTS

Eleven participants recounted their telehealth experiences and reported feeling satisfied, comfortable and confident with the session(s). They identified that previous experience with teleconferencing, access to optimal technical equipment, clinician skill, and caregiver assistance facilitated their telehealth participation. Participants highlighted that telehealth was beneficial as it reduced commuting time, COVID-19 exposure and fatigue from travel; and also allowed caregiver participation particularly during COVID. In comparing their in-person SLP sessions to telehealth sessions, limitations were also identified, including: lack of previous experience with and/or poor access to technology, and less opportunity for personalization. Participants indicated that use of phone alone was less preferred than an audio/video platform.

DISCUSSION

Patients reported that overall, telehealth sessions did not compromise their learning experience when compared to in-person sessions. Patients benefited from use of telehealth in several ways despite some limitations of the use of technology. Patient feedback about telehealth provides an important perspective that may be critical to inform best practices for care delivery.

Exercise-based dysphagia rehabilitation for adults with oesophageal cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Dysphagia is prevalent in oesophageal cancer with significant clinical and psychosocial complications. The purpose of this study was i) to examine the impact of exercise-based dysphagia rehabilitation on clinical and quality of life outcomes in this population and ii) to identify key rehabilitation components that may inform future research in this area.

METHODS

Randomised control trials (RCT), non-RCTs, cohort studies and case series were included. 10 databases (CINAHL Complete, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, OpenGrey, PROSPERO, RIAN and SpeechBITE), 3 clinical trial registries, and relevant conference abstracts were searched in November 2020. Two independent authors assessed articles for eligibility before completing data extraction, quality assessment using ROBINS-I and Downs and Black Checklist, followed by descriptive data analysis. The primary outcomes included oral intake, respiratory status and quality of life. All comparable outcomes were combined and discussed throughout the manuscript as primary and secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Three single centre non-randomised control studies involving 311 participants were included. A meta-analysis could not be completed due to study heterogeneity. SLT-led post-operative dysphagia intervention led to significantly earlier start to oral intake and reduced length of post-operative hospital stay. No studies found a reduction in aspiration pneumonia rates, and no studies included patient reported or quality of life outcomes. Of the reported secondary outcomes, swallow prehabilitation resulted in significantly improved swallow efficiency following oesophageal surgery compared to the control group, and rehabilitation following surgery resulted in significantly reduced vallecular and pyriform sinus residue. The three studies were found to have 'serious' to 'critical' risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review highlights a low-volume of low-quality evidence to support exercise-based dysphagia rehabilitation in adults undergoing surgery for oesophageal cancer. As dysphagia is a common symptom impacting quality of life throughout survivorship, findings will guide future research to determine if swallowing rehabilitation should be included in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes. This review is limited by the inclusion of non-randomised control trials and the reliance on Japanese interpretation which may have resulted in bias. The reviewed studies were all of weak design with limited data reported.