Current aspects of the quality of head and neck cancer care - survey of the Scandinavian Society for Head and Neck Oncology.

Autor:	Ilmarinen T; Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland., Bratland Å; Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway., Tøndel H; Department of Oncology, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim, Norway., Guðjónsson A; Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Landspitali University Hospital, Reykjavik, Iceland., Gebre-Medhin M; Department of Hematology, Oncology, and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden., Palmgren B; Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden., Mäenpää H; Department of Oncology, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland., Bjørndal K; Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark., Grau Eriksen J; Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.; Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Acta oto-laryngologica [Acta Otolaryngol] 2024 May-Jun; Vol. 144 (5-6), pp. 404-408. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Aug 07.
DOI:	10.1080/00016489.2024.2386097
Abstrakt:	Background: All Nordic countries have national cancer registries collecting data on head and neck cancer (HNC) incidence and survival. However, there is a lack of consensus on how other quality aspects should be monitored. Aims: We conducted a web-based survey to find opportunities for quality control and improvement. Methods: A web-based survey was sent to one otorhinolaryngology - head and neck (ORL-HN) surgeon, and one oncologist at each Nordic university hospital treating HNC. In total, 42 responses from all 21 university hospitals were included. Results: In over half of the university hospitals, an oncologist, an ORL-HN surgeon, a pathologist, a radiologist, and a specialized nurse was always present at the multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB) meeting. Of 42 respondents 35 (83%) agreed that treatment delays were systematically recorded for each patient. Eleven of 21 (52%) oncologists agreed that side-effects of (chemo)radiotherapy were systematically recorded. Less than half of the respondents agreed that complications of surgery, and post-treatment quality of life (QOL) were systematically recorded. Conclusions: In the Nordic countries, the importance of HNC treatment timelines is well acknowledged. There is a lack of consensus on the composition of MTB meeting, and how treatment-related morbidity should be monitored outside clinical trials.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu