A head and neck cancer intervention for use in survivorship clinics: a protocol for a feasibility study

Hearing screening and amplifier uptake results in a multidisciplinary head and neck cancer survivorship clinic

PURPOSE

Hearing loss and tinnitus are prevalent among survivors of head and neck cancer (HNC), but auditory issues are under-addressed in the survivorship literature. The purpose of this study was to describe the hearing loss and management experience of a group of survivors provided with a hearing screening and amplifier assistance if needed during their visit.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of 1176 individuals seen in the HNC Survivorship Clinic between December 2016 and October 2020 who interacted with audiology was performed.

RESULTS

Of these survivors, 72% failed the 30-dB HL hearing screening at one or more frequencies. Thirty-three percent of the sample reported tinnitus. Consistent with the general population, this group has a low prevalence of hearing aid use. In this clinic, individuals who fail the hearing screening at all frequencies are offered a simple, non-custom amplifier for use during their visit. Thirty-one percent of individuals offered the amplifier used it during their Survivorship Clinic visit to enhance communication and reduce listening effort. Only 54% of individuals who failed the hearing screening self-reported hearing loss. The poor sensitivity and specificity associated with the self-perception of hearing loss data support the need for hearing screening that consists of responding to tones. Of individuals who received a recommendation for a comprehensive hearing test, 21% received a hearing test with 68% of these individuals receiving the hearing test the same day of their Survivorship Clinic visit.

CONCLUSIONS

The data from 1176 survivors of HNC seen by audiology over the past few years as part of the UPMC HNC Survivorship Clinic support the need for hearing management in this population to improve communication during and after the Survivorship Clinic visit.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Survivors of HNC have a high prevalence of greater than mild hearing loss and tinnitus (both issues known to negatively impact health-related communication and quality of life). This manuscript describes a hearing screening program within a Survivorship Clinic that identifies individuals in need of non-custom amplification during their appointment to support effective communication. Survivors should be referred to audiologists for evaluation and management of treatment-related issues of hearing.

Adaptation of a Personalized Electronic Care Planning Tool for Cancer Follow-up Care: Formative Study

BACKGROUND

Most patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer will survive for at least 5 years; thus, engaging patients to optimize their health will likely improve outcomes. Clinical guidelines recommend patients receive a comprehensive care plan (CP) when transitioning from active treatment to survivorship, which includes support for ongoing symptoms and recommended healthy behaviors. Yet, cancer care providers find this guideline difficult to implement. Future directions for survivorship care planning include enhancing information technology support for developing personalized CPs, using CPs to facilitate self-management, and assessing CPs in clinical settings.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to develop an electronic tool for colorectal cancer follow-up care (CFC) planning.

METHODS

Incorporating inputs from health care professionals and patient stakeholders is fundamental to the successful integration of any tool into the clinical workflow. Thus, we followed the Integrate, Design, Assess, and Share (IDEAS) framework to adapt an existing application for stroke care planning (COMPASS-CP) to meet the needs of colorectal cancer survivors (COMPASS-CP CFC). Constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided our approach. We completed this work in 3 phases: (1) gathering qualitative feedback from stakeholders about the follow-up CP generation design and workflow; (2) adapting algorithms and resource data sources needed to generate a follow-up CP; and (3) optimizing the usability of the adapted prototype of COMPASS-CP CFC. We also quantitatively measured usability (target average score ≥70; range 0-100), acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility.

RESULTS

In the first phase, health care professionals (n=7), and patients and caregivers (n=7) provided qualitative feedback on COMPASS-CP CFC that informed design elements such as selection, interpretation, and clinical usefulness of patient-reported measures. In phase 2, we built a minimal viable product of COMPASS-CP CFC. This tool generated CPs based on the needs identified by patient-completed measures (including validated patient-reported outcomes) and electronic health record data, which were then matched with resources by zip code and preference to support patients' self-management. Elements of the CFIR assessed revealed that most health care professionals believed the tool would serve patients' needs and had advantages. In phase 3, the average System Usability Scale score was above our target score for health care professionals (n=5; mean 71.0, SD 15.2) and patients (n=5; mean 95.5, SD 2.1). Participants also reported high levels of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. Additional CFIR-informed feedback, such as desired format for training, will inform future studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The data collected in this study support the initial usability of COMPASS-CP CFC and will inform the next steps for implementation in clinical care. COMPASS-CP CFC has the potential to streamline the implementation of personalized CFC planning to enable systematic access to resources that will support self-management. Future research is needed to test the impact of COMPASS-CP CFC on patient health outcomes.

Improving lung cancer screening rates among patients with head and neck cancer in a radiation oncology clinic

Background

The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends lung cancer screening via annual low dose computed tomography (LDCT) for high risk patients. Despite the strong evidence of a mortality benefit from several randomized clinical trials, rates of lung cancer screening remain low. We plan to assess how screening guidelines are implemented in a radiation oncology clinic for patients with head and neck cancer.

Methods

A single institution, retrospective chart review was used to identify patients with head and neck cancer seen in a radiation oncology clinic who were potentially eligible for lung cancer screening under the current USPSTF guidelines. Patients who were potentially screening-eligible were enrolled in a phone survey to assess their knowledge about lung cancer screening and willingness to be screened.

Results

Of the 184 patients with head and neck cancer seen in the clinic, 8 (4%) patients were eligible for lung cancer screening under the previous USPSTF recommendations, including 1 (0.5%) patient already being screened. One patient (0.5%) became eligible under the expanded guidelines. All 184 patients had smoking history documented. Of the 87 current or former smokers, there were 24 (28%) who did not have pack-years documented; of the 82 former smokers, there were 8 (10%) who did not have quit date documented. Among the 16 phone survey participants (response rate: 70%) only 6 (38%) were aware there is a way to screen for lung cancer and 12 (75%) patients would be interested in screening if they are found to be eligible.

Conclusions

These findings highlight a potential opportunity to increase rates of lung cancer screening among patients with head and neck cancer by both enhancing provider awareness as well as patient education at the community level.

Substance use and mental health burden in head and neck and other cancer survivors: A National Health Interview Survey analysis

BACKGROUND

Tobacco dependence, alcohol abuse, depression, distress, and other adverse patient-level influences are common in head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors. Their interrelatedness and precise burden in comparison with survivors of other cancers are poorly understood.

METHODS

National Health Interview Survey data from 1997 to 2016 were pooled. The prevalence of adverse patient-level influences among HNC survivors and matched survivors of other cancers were compared using descriptive statistics. Multivariable logistic regressions evaluating covariate associations with the primary study outcomes were performed. These included 1) current cigarette smoking and/or heavy alcohol use (>14 drinks per week) and 2) high mental health burden (severe psychological distress [Kessler Index ≥ 13] and/or frequent depressive/anxiety symptoms).

RESULTS

In all, 918 HNC survivors and 3672 matched survivors of other cancers were identified. Compared with other cancer survivors, more HNC survivors were current smokers and/or heavy drinkers (24.6% [95% CI, 21.5%-27.7%] vs 18.0% [95% CI, 16.6%-19.4%]) and exhibited a high mental health burden (18.6% [95% CI, 15.7%-21.5%] vs 13.0% [95% CI, 11.7%-14.3%]). In multivariable analyses, 1) a high mental health burden predicted for smoking and/or heavy drinking (odds ratio [OR], 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-1.9), and 2) current cigarette smoking predicted for a high mental health burden (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.3). Furthermore, nonpartnered marital status and uninsured/Medicaid insurance status were significantly associated with both cigarette smoking and/or heavy alcohol use (ORs, 1.9 [95% CI, 1.4-2.5] and 1.5 [95% CI, 1.0-2.1], respectively) and a high mental health burden (ORs, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.1 -1.8] and 3.0 [95% CI, 2.2-4.2], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Stakeholders should allocate greater supportive care resources to HNC survivors. The interdependence of substance abuse, adverse mental health symptoms, and other adverse patient-level influences requires development of novel, multimodal survivorship care interventions.

A Pilot Study of a Collaborative Palliative and Oncology Care Intervention for Patients with Head and Neck Cancer

Background: Palliative care improves symptoms and coping in patients with advanced cancers, but has not been evaluated for patients with curable solid malignancies. Because of the tremendous symptom burden and high rates of psychological distress in head and neck cancer (HNC), we evaluated feasibility and acceptability of a palliative care intervention in patients with HNC receiving curative-intent chemoradiation therapy (CRT). Methods: This was a prospective single-arm study in HNC patients receiving CRT at a single center in the United States. The intervention entailed weekly palliative care visits integrated with oncology care with a focus on symptoms and coping. The primary outcome was feasibility, defined as a >50% enrollment rate with >70% of patients attending at least half of the visits. To assess acceptability, we collected satisfaction ratings post-intervention. We also explored symptom burden, mood, and quality of life (QOL). Results: We enrolled 91% (20/22) of eligible patients. Patients attended 133 of 138 palliative care visits (96%); all 20 attended >85% of visits. Eighteen of 19 (95%) found the intervention "very helpful" and would "definitely recommend" it. QOL and symptom burden worsened from baseline to week 5, but subsequently improved at one-month post-CRT. Overall, patients valued the one-on-one format of the intervention and receipt of additional care. Conclusions: Our palliative care intervention during highly morbid CRT was feasible and acceptable with high enrollment, excellent intervention compliance, and high patient satisfaction. Future randomized studies will further explore the impact on patient-reported outcomes and health care utilization.

Incorporating Multiple Perspectives Into the Development of an Electronic Survivorship Platform for Head and Neck Cancer

PURPOSE

To improve the care of survivors of head and neck cancer, we developed the Head and Neck Survivorship Tool: Assessment and Recommendations (HN-STAR). HN-STAR is an electronic platform that incorporates patient-reported outcomes into a clinical decision support tool for use at a survivorship visit. Selections in the clinical decision support tool automatically populate a survivorship care plan (SCP). We aimed to refine HN-STAR by eliciting and incorporating feedback on its ease of use and usefulness.

METHODS

Human-computer interaction (HCI) experts reviewed HN-STAR using think-aloud testing and the Nielsen Heuristic Checklist. Nurse practitioners (NPs) thought aloud while reviewing the clinical decision support tool and SCP and responded to an interview. Survivors used HN-STAR as part of a routine visit and were interviewed afterward. We analyzed themes from the feedback. We described how we addressed each theme to improve the usability of HN-STAR.

RESULTS

Five HCI experts, 10 NPs, and 10 cancer survivors provided complementary usability insight that we categorized into themes of improvements. For ease of use, themes included technical design considerations to enhance user interface, ease of completion of a self-assessment, streamlining text, disruption of the clinic visit, and threshold for symptoms to appear on the SCP. The theme addressing usefulness was efficiency and comprehensiveness of the clinic visit. For each theme, we report revisions to HN-STAR in response to the feedback.

CONCLUSION

HCI experts provided key technical design insights into HN-STAR, whereas NPs and survivors provided usability feedback and clinical perspectives. We incorporated the feedback into the preparation for additional testing of HN-STAR. This method can inform and improve the ease of use and usefulness of the survivorship applications.

Automating Treatment Summary Development Using Electronic Billing Information: A Pilot Study of Survivors of Head and Neck Cancer

PURPOSE

Although the provision of a treatment summary (TS) is a quality indicator in oncology, routine delivery of TSs remains challenging. Automatic TS generation could facilitate use, but data on accuracy are lacking in complex cancers such as head and neck cancer (HNC). We developed and evaluated an electronic platform to automate TS generation for HNC.

METHODS

The algorithms autopopulated TSs using data from billing records and an institutional cancer registry. A nurse practitioner used the medical record to verify the accuracy of the information and made corrections electronically. Inaccurate and missing data were considered errors. We described and investigated reasons for errors in the automatically generated TSs.

RESULTS

We enrolled a heterogeneous population of 43 survivors of HNC. Using billing data, the information on primary site, lymph node status, radiation, and chemotherapy use was accurate in 93%, 95%, 93%, and 95% of patients, respectively. Billing data captured surgery accurately in 77% of patients; once an omitted billing code was identified, accuracy increased to 98%. Chemotherapies were captured in 90% of patients. Using the cancer registry, month and year of diagnosis were accurate in 91% of cases; stage was accurate in 28% of cases. Reprogramming the algorithm to ascertain clinical stage when pathologic stage was unavailable resulted in 100% accuracy. The algorithms inconsistently identified radiation receipt and treating physicians from billing data.

CONCLUSION

It is feasible to automatically and accurately generate most components of TSs for HNC using billing and cancer registry data, although clinical review is necessary in some cases.

Models of Care for Survivors of Childhood Cancer From Across the Globe: Advancing Survivorship Care in the Next Decade

With improvements in cancer treatment and supportive care, a growing population of survivors of childhood cancer at risk for significant and potentially life-threatening late effects has been identified. To provide a current snapshot of the models of care from countries with varying levels of resources and health care systems, stakeholders in childhood cancer survivorship clinical care and research were identified from 18 countries across five continents. Stakeholders responded to a survey and provided a brief narrative regarding the current state of survivorship care. Findings indicate that among pediatric-age survivors of childhood cancer (allowing for differences in age cutoffs across countries), resources are generally available, and a large proportion of survivors are seen by a physician familiar with late effects in most countries. After survivors transition to adulthood, only a minority are seen by a physician familiar with late effects. Despite the need to improve communication between pediatric oncology and primary care, only a few countries have existing national efforts to educate primary care physicians, although many more reported that educational programs are in development. These data highlight common challenges and potential solutions for the lifelong care of survivors of childhood cancer. Combining risk-based and patient-oriented solutions for this population is likely to benefit both providers and patients.