No abstract

IntroductionMaintaining adequate nutrition for Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) patients is challenging due to both the malignancy and the rigours of radiation treatment. As yet, health behaviour interventions designed to maintain or improve nutrition in patients with HNC have not been evaluated. The proposed trial builds on promising pilot data, and evaluates the effectiveness of a dietitian-delivered health behaviour intervention to reduce malnutrition in patients with HNC undergoing radiotherapy: Eating As Treatment (EAT).Methods and analysisA stepped-wedge cluster randomised design will be used. All recruitment hospitals begin in the control condition providing treatment as usual. In a randomly generated order, oncology staff at each hospital will receive 2 days of training in EAT before switching to the intervention condition. Training will be supplemented by ongoing supervision, coaching and a 2-month booster training provided by the research team. EAT is based on established behaviour change counselling methods, including motivational interviewing, cognitive–behavioural therapy, and incorporates clinical practice change theory. It is designed to improve motivation to eat despite a range of barriers (pain, mucositis, nausea, reduced or no saliva, taste changes and appetite loss), and to provide patients with practical behaviour change strategies. EAT will be delivered by dietitians during their usual consultations. 400 patients with HNC (nasopharynx, hypopharynx, oropharynx, oral cavity or larynx), aged 18+, undergoing radiotherapy (>60 Gy) with curative intent, will be recruited from radiotherapy departments at 5 Australian sites. Assessments will be conducted at 4 time points (first and final week of radiotherapy, 4 and 12 weeks postradiotherapy). The primary outcome will be a nutritional status assessment.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval from all relevant bodies has been granted. Study findings will be disseminated widely through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.Trial registration numberACTRN12613000320752.

ObjectivesThe primary aim of the review was to determine the effectiveness of strategies to improve clinician provision of psychosocial distress screening and referral of patients with cancer.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesElectronic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL)) were searched until July 2016.Inclusion criteriaPopulation: adult patients with cancer and clinical staff members. Intervention: any strategy that aimed to improve the rate of routine screening and referral for detected distress of patients with cancer. Comparison: no intervention controls, ‘usual’ practice or alternative interventions. Outcome: (primary) any measure of provision of screening and/or referral for distress, (secondary) psychosocial distress, unintended adverse effects. Design: trials with or without a temporal comparison group, including randomised and non-randomised trials, and uncontrolled pre–post studies.Data extraction and analysisTwo review authors independently extracted data. Heterogeneity across studies precluded quantitative assessment via meta-analysis and so a narrative synthesis of the results is presented.ResultsFive studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies were set in oncology clinics or departments and used multiple implementation strategies. Using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation, the overall rating of the certainty of the body of evidence reported in this review was assessed as very low. Three studies received a methodological quality rating of weak and two studies received a rating of moderate. Only one of the five studies reported a significant improvement in referrals.ConclusionsThe review identified five studies of predominantly poor quality examining the effectiveness of strategies to improve the routine implementation of distress screening and referral for patients with cancer. Future research using robust research designs, including randomised assignment, are needed to identify effective support strategies to maximise the potential for successful implementation of distress screening and referral for patients with cancer.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42015017518.

We aimed to determine the prevalence and co‐occurrence of tobacco smoking, alcohol consumption, and depressive symptoms among a sample of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients undergoing radiotherapy. A total of 307 HNC patients participated in a multi‐site stepped‐wedge randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the effectiveness of a dietitian‐delivered health behavior intervention in patients with HNC undergoing radiotherapy. During week one of radiotherapy patients completed measures of smoking, alcohol consumption, and level of depression. Approximately one‐fifth (21%) of patients had two or more co‐occurring problems: current smoking, hazardous alcohol use, and/or likely presence of a major depressive episode (MDE). Approximately one‐third (34%) of the sample were current smokers, one‐third (31%) were drinking hazardously and almost one‐fifth (19%) had likely cases of depression. Comorbidity of smoking, hazardous alcohol use, and MDE is high in HNC patients, and interventions need to address this cluster of cancer risk factors.

PurposeThe aim of this study was to explore head and neck cancer (HNC) patient experiences of a novel dietitian delivered health behaviour intervention.MethodsThis study is a qualitative study which employed semi-structured individual interviews using open and axial coding and then final selective coding to organise the data. Patients with HNC who had participated in a dietitian delivered health behaviour intervention to reduce malnutrition were invited to discuss their experience of this intervention. Individual interviews were conducted, transcribed and analysed using grounded theory.ResultsNine patients participated in the interviews. Four dimensions were identified in the initial coding process: ‘information’, which described patients’ desire for tailored advice during their treatment; ‘challenges of treatment experience’, which described the difficulties related to treatment side effects; ‘key messages: importance of eating and maintaining weight’, which covered perceived integral messages delivered to patients by dietitians; and ‘dietitian’s approach’ describing patient experiences of empathic and compassionate dietitians. Two overarching themes resulted from examining the connections and relationships between these dimensions: ‘survival’, a connection between eating and living; and ‘support’, describing the valued working partnership between dietitian and patient.ConclusionsDimensions and themes overlapped with the qualitative literature on HNC patient experience of treatment. However, some themes, such as the empowerment of a message linking eating to survival, appeared unique to this study. Patients found this message to be delivered in a supportive manner that motivated change.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s00520-017-4029-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Best practice guidelines make a number of recommendations regarding dietitian management of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. Randomized trials assessing the effectiveness of clinical practice change strategies for improving the nutritional management of HNC patients have not previously been conducted. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of practice change strategies on improving the implementation of best practice guideline recommendations for the nutritional management of HNC patients. Four Australian radiotherapy departments participated in a stepped-wedge, randomized controlled trial. Baseline data were collected across all sites simultaneously, and the intervention was then introduced to each site sequentially, in a randomly determined order. During the intervention phase, sites received a range of supportive clinical practice change strategies to facilitate dietitian adherence to clinical practice guidelines. To assess the associated practice change by dietetic staff, we evaluated the change in implementation of six guideline recommendations for dietitians from preintervention to postintervention periods. Adherence to the clinical practice guidelines during the preintervention period was generally very low. The clinical practice change strategies significantly improved the odds of provision of four of the six guideline recommendations. The study found the intervention significantly enhanced dietitian provision of recommended care for HNC patients during the postintervention period. This finding holds clinical importance for clinician and health service effective implementation of guideline recommendations as well as HNC patient treatment outcomes. Trial registration number ACTRN12613000320752, https://www.anzctr.org.au.

ObjectiveTo examine the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in improving cessation rates and smoking related behaviour in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC).DesignA systematic review of randomised and non-randomised controlled trials.MethodsWe searched the following data sources: CENTRAL in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL up to February 2016. A search of reference lists of included studies and Google Scholar (first 200 citations published online between 2000 and February 2016) was also undertaken. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool (EPHPP). 2 study authors independently screened and extracted data with disagreements resolved via consensus.ResultsOf the 5167 studies identified, 3 were eligible and included in the review. Trial designs of included studies were 2 randomised controlled trials and 1 non-randomised controlled trial. 2 studies received a weak methodological rating and 1 received a moderate methodological rating. The trials examine the impact of the following interventions: (1) nurse delivered cognitive–behaviour therapy (CBT) via telephone and accompanied by a workbook, combined with pharmacotherapy; (2) nurse and physician brief advice to quit and information booklets combined with pharmacotherapy; and (3) surgeon delivered enhanced advice to quit smoking augmented by booster sessions. Only the trial of the nurse delivered CBT and pharmacotherapy reported significant increases in smoking cessation rates. 1 study measured quit attempts and the other assessed consumption of cigarettes per day and readiness to change. There was no significant improvement in quit attempts or cigarettes smoked per day among patients in the intervention groups, relative to control.ConclusionsThere are very few studies evaluating the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions that report results specific to the HNC population. The 3 trials identified reported equivocal findings. Extended CBT counselling coupled with pharmacotherapy may be effective.Trial registration numberCRD42016016421.

CRD42015014676.