Quality of life of head and neck cancer patients in urban and regional areas: An Australian perspective. (17th June 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Pateman, Kelsey A.; Cockburn, Nicole L.; Batstone, Martin D.; Ford, Pauline J.
• Is Part Of: Australian journal of rural health. Volume 26:Number 3(2018)
• Page Start: 157
• Page End: 164
• Publication Date: 2018-06-17
• Subjects: head and neck cancer -- health‐related quality of life -- mouth neoplasms -- quality of life -- urban rural; Rural health -- Periodicals; Rural health -- Australia -- Periodicals; 613
• DOI: 10.1111/ajr.12340
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1038-5282

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: Head and neck cancer treatment affects quality of life. There are differences in quality of life outcomes and perceived supportive care needs between cancer patients living in metropolitan and regional–remote areas. This study investigated quality of life over the first 6 months following head and neck cancer diagnosis and observed differences in quality of life by geographical location. Design: Prospective observational study. Setting: Tertiary hospital in Brisbane, Australia. Participants: Newly diagnosed patients who were referred for the diagnosis, and/or treatment of head and neck cancer. Main outcome measure(s): Quality of life was measured by the University of Washington Quality of Life Survey, version 4 (UW‐QoL). Participants completed the UW‐QoL questionnaire prior to starting treatment, 1 month and 6 months post treatment. Metropolitan and regional or remote status was classified according to the Australian Standard Geographic Classification‐Remoteness Area system. Results: Ninety‐five participants were included at baseline; 49 and 41 participants completed the 1‐month and 6‐month follow‐ups, respectively. Scores in most UW‐QoL domains decreased between baseline and 1 month post treatment and increased towards pre‐treatment scores at the 6‐month follow‐up (except for anxiety and saliva). Pain at baseline was significantly worse in the regional–remote participants compared with metropolitan participants. No other statistically significant differences in UW‐QoL score by geographical location were observed. Conclusion: The findings generally did not support significant differences in quality of life outcome between metropolitan and regional–remote head and neck cancer patients. The difference in pain experience between metropolitan and regional–remote groups requires further investigation.